Bridgegood
Legal name: Oakland Digital Arts and Literacy Center Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 270720655
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2020–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2010
- Location
- Oakland, CA, US
- Phone
- (510) 435-2945
- Rating
- 84
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Education N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $178,543
- Expenses
- $243,576
- Assets
- $870,300
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
12 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Shaun Tai (Executive Director)
- Lisa Towles (President Board of Directors)
- Brodie Rich (Vice President Board of Directors)
Highest reported compensation
- Shaun Tai (Executive Director): $96,500 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Design for social good, digital equity, racial justice, and community belonging.
What it reported doing in 2024
Inspire Oakland equips more than 1,300 under-resourced students annually through a 4-month career readiness program that includes design training resume building and professional development. Since its founding Inspire Oakland has reached more than 16,800 students generating $69.5M in career and job training ROI collectively. The initiative combines workforce preparation with a regionwide design challenge serving up to 50 schools each year. Participants gain skills in Adobe Photoshop and related tools along with career counseling from business and technology professionals. The design challenge invites students to create billboards and new media exploring the theme What about Oakland inspires you? The top 20 participants earn recognition and paid opportunities while the top six secure commercial media placements generating over 90 million impressions worldwide.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 80% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 86
- Transparency & Controls: 89
- Accountability: 90
- Sustainability: 35
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 78.9%; rating input score 79
- Fundraising efficiency: $9.66 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -36.4%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.57; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 39.6%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -0.3% per year; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 7 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 3 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 78.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $192K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $96K · 12 people listed
- Consistency: 42 of 43 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 38/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.