Mockingbird Incubator

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
831987515
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-N 2022
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
6262725802
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,832,973
Expenses
$1,578,378
Assets
$759,849
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • JESSICA PAYNE (EXECUTIVE DI): $91,734 total reported compensation
  • PAMELA GUTIERREZ (CHIEF OP OFF): $89,804 total reported compensation
  • RACHEL FRANCAVILLO (CHIEF FINANC): $54,448 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To engage in charitable and education activities to educate nonprofit and business leaders

What it reported doing in 2025

Others are as follows bardfly theatre co. Bardfly theatre co. Produces site-specific theatre that builds community and advances arts and culture in los angeles. Bardfly aims to make theatre, including shakespeare, a fun and accessible social experience for los angeles audiences. Los angeles zoo nonprofit fund the los angeles zoo nonprofit fund raises funds to support the los angeles zoos mission to save wildlife, enrich our communities, and create connections to nature pause pause is dedicated to supporting people of color through grief and end of life with safe, culturally-sensitive, and expert-informed resources. Pause offers digital and in-person resources and programming serving individuals, companies, and deathcare professionals. Legal empowerment and advocacy hub (leah) leah practices, promotes and develops the best practices of legal empowerment, community peacebuilding and community organizing to expand access to justice, peace and power for isolated, vulnerable and incarcerated communities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 76% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 60% for direct work, and 40% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 44
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 63.3%; rating input score 63
  • Program expense ratio: 74.1%; rating input score 74
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.07 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.9%; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 40%; rating input score 40; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 13.9%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.48; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.5%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 85% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 82.2% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 77% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 63.3% of revenue deployed · 74.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $92K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

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

  • Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 40/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 35/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 24/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 44/100.