Net Positive Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
462666977
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2016
Location
Buffalo, NY, USA
Phone
7168851381
Rating
88
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Centers to Support the Independence of Specific Populations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,292,833
Expenses
$1,095,126
Assets
$1,498,548
Liabilities
$410,412

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Andrew Schwartz (Vice President)
  • Najja Bouldin (President)
  • Megan McNally (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Megan McNally (Executive Director): $62,080 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Net Positive, Inc. provides youth and adults with the opportunity to pursue their business dreams with access to private space, equipment, and business assistance. An average of 200 students find success in hands-on skill

What it reported doing in 2024

Youth Education & Workforce Development The Foundry advances education, empowerment, and employment by serving an average of 200 youth annually from K12 students to out-of-school emerging adults up to age 24. Through hands-on STEAM learning in our shops and labs, participants gain exposure to career pathways, new digital literacies, and technical skill-building that translates into real opportunities. Our workforce pipeline includes job training partnerships with Baker-Victory Services and YouthBuild, paid part-time employment through FOUNDRYmade, job-shadowing with onsite entrepreneurs, and youth entrepreneurship programs that teach financial literacy, product development, and public market selling. Together, these layered experiences move youth from curiosity to competency to career.

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 69% for direct work, and 31% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 95%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: $71.75 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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: 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: 15.3%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.37; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.27; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.7%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 24.2% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 23.5% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.2% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82% of revenue deployed · 95% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $62K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 51/100.