Neighborhood Impact Investment Fund
Legal name: Neighborhood Impact Investment Fund Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 832643429
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2018–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Jul 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Baltimore, MD, USA
- Phone
- 4102183437
- Rating
- 83
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Urban, Community Economic Development
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $8,474,230
- Expenses
- $5,947,138
- Assets
- $65,279,260
- Liabilities
- $51,950,737
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
19 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MARK KAUFMAN (PRESIDENT AND CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- MARK KAUFMAN (PRESIDENT AND CEO): $224,825 total reported compensation
- RYAN RATTANNI (CHIEF LOAN OFFICER): $163,026 total reported compensation
- HEIDI HANSEN (GENERAL COUNSEL AND LOAN OFFICER): $151,126 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
We are a mission-driven investment fund dedicated to delivering capital and promoting inclusive growth in Baltimore’s historically disinvested neighborhoods.
What it reported doing in 2024
Niif is a non-profit organization created to deliver capital to, and to promote equitable growth in, historically disinvested neighborhoods in baltimore. Initially capitalized with a long-term, subordinate loan from the city of baltimore, niif is an independent organization that works in alignment with the city's neighborhood focus and community development goals. Niif supports communities through loans and investments that can accelerate community revitalization, catalyze business activity and provide greater opportunities for residents.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 41% for direct work, and 59% for grants.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Liabilities are high compared with assets and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 78
- Transparency & Controls: 79
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 71
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 71.5%; rating input score 72
- Program expense ratio: 88%; rating input score 88
- Fundraising efficiency: $43.16 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- 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: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 29.8%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 10.98; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.8; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 11.5%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 35.6% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 30.1% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 71.5% of revenue deployed · 88% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5.2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $225K · 19 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $340K reported
- Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 6 filing years from 2018 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 9 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 4 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.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 10/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 26/100.