Mathkind Global

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
463381163
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2014, Form 990-N 2013
Location
Chapel Hill, NC, USA
Phone
9194486690
Rating
56
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Nonmonetary Support N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$508,622
Expenses
$451,181
Assets
$329,964
Liabilities
$7,484

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Kimberly Glenn (Executive Director)
  • Linda Gojack (Past President)
  • Mark Otter (Vice President)
  • Hunter Bost (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Kimberly Glenn (Executive Director): $123,811 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To build quality math education programs through collaborative partnerships that drive greater social justice.

What it reported doing in 2024

International Professional Development. In 2024, our programs continued to evolve, and we offered in-person, virtual, and hybrid programs for greater access and reach. We ran a total of 15 programs, working directly with 1170 K-12 international teachers and 754 students and indirectly reaching over 19,930 students. Our flagship programs - MathMobile and Girls STEM Club - grew to three new locations (Solola (Guatemala), Amazonia, and Azogues (Ecuador) and allowed us to continue deepening the professional development work we do with teachers and advance in our theory of change and program model to progress teachers from "Learn" to "Apply." Additionally, our bi-annual virtual program, Math Marathon, continues to grow its audience and reach more teachers and, in 2024, saw its first hybrid iteration in partnership with the National University for Education in Ecuador [Universidad Nacional de Educación (UNAE)].

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 91% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

MIXED - Most voting board members are independent and revenue has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 50
  • Transparency & Controls: 51
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 51.7%; rating input score 52
  • Program expense ratio: 58.2%; rating input score 58
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.79 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 11.3%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.73; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 27.4%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.5% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 21.3% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 51.7% of revenue deployed · 58.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $262K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $124K · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 52/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 58/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 16/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.