Multicultural Career Intern Program

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521263933
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2029397700
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,870,362
Expenses
$2,898,876
Assets
$1,377,858
Liabilities
$308,209

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARIA TUKEVA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR EMERITU)
  • KAPINDI KROMA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • KAPINDI KROMA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $236,173 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of mcip and its public school affiliate, chec, is to strive to become a model professional learning community that respects and responds to the diverse needs of our underserved students by preparing them for the acasemic rigors of college and as leaders in the quest for social justice. A professional learning community is a collaborative academic environment in which the administrative staff and teachers in a school continuously seek and share learning and then act on what they learn. The goal is to enhance their effectiveness as professionals to benefit student education. The results of this research-based approach is that students experience decreased dropout rate and fewer classes "skipped", lower rates of absenteeism, increased learning that is distributed more equitably in a smaller sized school, greater academic gains than in traditional schools, and smaller achievement gaps between students from different backgrounds.

What it reported doing in 2024

. Citytutor dc high-impact tutoring (hit) grant (after school)grantor: office of the state superintendent of education (osse) / citytutor dc sites served: columbia heights educational campus (chec), harriet tubman elementary school, powell elementary schoolin partnership with citytutor dc and osse, mcip delivered high-dosage, evidence-based tutoring to close academic opportunity gaps in foundational literacy and math. By integrating targeted, small-group instruction (1:1 to 1:3 ratios) directly into the school day at chec, tubman elementary, and powell elementary, the program drove measurable improvements in grade-level proficiency. This ensured at-risk students received consistent, direct academic acceleration to build vital skills and classroom confidence.2. Osse community schools incentive initiative (csii) (after school)grantor: office of the state superintendent of education (osse) sites served: columbia heights educational campus (chec), harriet tubman elementary schooloperating as a vital community hub, mcip utilized the osse community schools incentive initiative to deploy full-time community school coordinators at chec and tubman elementary. The program successfully removed non-academic barriers to learning by facilitating comprehensive wraparound service interventions. By integrating school-based mental health care, adult family education, and targeted chronic absenteeism tracking, the initiative stabilized families and actively improved overall student attendance and engagement.3. Osse whole child initiative (after school)grantor: office of the state superintendent of education (osse) sites served: columbia heights educational campus (chec), harriet tubman elementary school, powell elementary school, randle highlands elementary school aligning with the cdc's whole school, whole community, whole child framework, mcip cultivated safe, trauma-informed learning environments across chec, tubman, powell, and randle highlands. This osse-funded initiative trained educators in secondary traumatic stress mitigation and deeply integrated social-emotional learning and physical health education into daily student routines. This holistic approach directly improved overall school climate and student well-being metrics.5. Ovsjg: delinquency prevention (after school)grantor: office of victim services and justice grants (ovsjg) sites served: target populations within mcip's network. Through a strategic partnership with the district of columbia office of victim services and justice grants, mcip executed evidence-based interventions to keep at-risk youth safely engaged in their education. By providing dedicated case management and robust truancy reduction services, the program successfully diverted youth from the juvenile justice system, measurably reducing chronic absenteeism and championing positive youth development.6. Learn24: out of school time (ost) program (after school)grantor: office of out of school time grants and youth outcomes (learn24) sites served: target populations within mcip's network. Mcip maximized the impact of the learn24 out of school time grant by creating structured, enriching after-school environments for our students. Led by dedicated educators, the program delivered high-quality academic and extracurricular programming. This initiative kept youth safely engaged outside of standard instructional hours while actively building essential life skills that strongly align with district youth development outcomes.9. Osse community schools: summer bridge (after school)grantor: office of the state superintendent of education (osse) sites served: target populations within mcip's network. - to proactively mitigate summer learning loss, mcip leveraged osse funding to deliver the comprehensive summer bridge program. This initiative provided targeted academic readiness and social-emotional transitional support for youth advancing to new grade levels or school environments. By completing this transitional programming, part

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 95% 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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 27
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 79.5%; rating input score 80
  • Program expense ratio: 78.6%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: $33.45 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.48; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.22; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.1%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.9% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.4% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 79.5% of revenue deployed · 78.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $2.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $236K · 12 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 36/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.