One Hundred Black Men Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237379940
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2127777070
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,294,661
Expenses
$1,408,207
Assets
$917,418
Liabilities
$247,039

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

Leadership & pay

25 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Robert B Brown (President)
  • Jermaine Huell (1st Vice President)
  • COURTNEY BENNETT (2nd Vice President)
  • Reginald Miller (3rd Vice President)
  • ERIK CLIETTE (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • ERIK CLIETTE (Executive Director): $165,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Ohbm inc. Mission is to play a proactive role in leveraging our collective talent, ability & energy toward achieving meaningful gains in our low income communities. The organizationsinitiatives focus on education through mentoring, wealth building strategies, fostering economic development & raising awareness of health issues affecting our communities.

What it reported doing in 2024

DYCD JOH Program The Mentors Matter Program served 600 students, provided 12,000 hours of mentoring, and engaged young people in programs and trips to build leadership skills, explore careers, promote cultural understanding, and foster strong character.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 86% 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 most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 61
  • Transparency & Controls: 47
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 24
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 68.9%; rating input score 69
  • Program expense ratio: 63.4%; rating input score 63
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.25 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.2%; rating input score 88; 3rd 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 13th 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 8 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: 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: -8.8%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.65; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.27; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.7%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.1% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.8% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 68.9% of revenue deployed · 63.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 25 of 25 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $892K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $165K · 25 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 29 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 19/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 18/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.