Oakland Fund for Public Innovation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 872236607
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2022–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2021
- Location
- Oakland, CA, USA
- Phone
- 5102383141
- Rating
- 72
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Fund Raising and Fund Distribution
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $6,715,587
- Expenses
- $3,961,971
- Assets
- $5,371,171
- Liabilities
- $306,995
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
11 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Juma Crawford (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- Juma Crawford (CEO): $264,347 total reported compensation
- Alaina Long (COO): $45,291 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 Oakland Fund reaches across the city, engaging private partners to innovate, test and scale ideas that enhance Oakland. The Fund strives to improve the prosperity, safety and quality of life for all Oaklanders with projects that: build a more trustworthy and responsive government allow Oaklanders to stay rooted and thrive in our city and create a more vibrant and connected Oakland for all who live, work and play here.
What it reported doing in 2024
Rooted Educator Housing Rooted, an established housing program for Oakland educators, joined OFPI in FY25. The program provides equitable housing solutions, including stipends, rent discounts, reduced security deposits, lease guarantees, insurance supports, and financial coaching. Rooted served more than 260 educators, saving an average of $2,000 annually on rent. Participants spent 2829% of income on housingbelow the 30% affordability benchmarkand achieved a 92% retention rate vs. 82% district-wide.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 66% of its reported program spending out as grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and revenue has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 54
- Transparency & Controls: 83
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 68
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 43%; rating input score 43
- Program expense ratio: 70.2%; rating input score 70
- Fundraising efficiency: $21.77 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 99.5%; rating input score 100; 39th 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: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- 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: 41%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.36; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 7.8%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 19.1% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -4.1% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 43% of revenue deployed · 70.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $2.8M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $264K · 11 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $125K reported
- Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 15 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 13 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 43/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 48/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 38/100.