Running for a Better Oakland

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
273509778
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2013
Location
Oakland, CA, USA
Phone
9257662224
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Amateur Sports

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$241,409
Expenses
$191,419
Assets
$226,046
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Jessica de Leon (Executive Dir.): $24,846 total reported compensation
  • Bryon Mcgovern (Executive Dir.): $16,175 total reported compensation
  • Lindsey Singhavi (Foundation Mgr.): $6,643 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Running for a better oakland is a not-for-profit organization that encourages kindergarten-12th grade oakland students to develop healthy lifestyles through running

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 77% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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 the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 54
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 61.3%; rating input score 61
  • Program expense ratio: 76.6%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $115.71 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 73.7%; rating input score 74; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 20.7%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.18; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 26.1%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.5% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.3% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 21.2% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 61.3% of revenue deployed · 76.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 19 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $147K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $25K · 19 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 19 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2016 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.