Minds Matter National Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
133688434
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2126266534
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Development Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,348,573
Expenses
$1,441,874
Assets
$1,941,119
Liabilities
$32,139

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KATHLEEN ERIKA HALSTEAD (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • KATHLEEN ERIKA HALSTEAD (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $233,520 total reported compensation
  • COLIN DELANEY (CHIEF DEVELOPMENT OFFICER): $171,385 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Minds matter connects driven and determined students from low-income families with the people, preparation and possibilities to succeed in college, create their future, and change the world.

What it reported doing in 2024

Across the 14 minds matter chapters, the organization supported more than 1,100 students with the dedication of 2,000 volunteers. Minds matter's most significant activities are focused across three key domains - standardizing core programming, fostering chapter growth, and sustaining national leadership. Within core programming, the organization co-created a standard 10th grade mentoring curriculum, set standard kpis for all chapters, and established a set of social-emotional learning aptitudes unique to minds matter. Additionally, we fostered chapter growth by coaching four volunteer-led chapters towards hiring their first ed, hosted governance trainings for board members and board chairs, and created a new program fidelity agreement. (continuted on schedule o)minds matter focused on investing in national leadership by hiring the organization's first chief program officer and improving network operations and infrastructure.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 76% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 78% for direct work, and 22% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 47
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 53.1%; rating input score 53
  • Program expense ratio: 46.7%; rating input score 47
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.86 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -6.9%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.35; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 28.1%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13.2% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.3% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.8% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 53.1% of revenue deployed · 46.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $673K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $234K · 18 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 16 filed related-organization links
  • 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 53/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 47/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 17/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.