San Diego Futures Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
330883460
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
San Diego, CA, US
Phone
(619) 500-9330
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,533,119
Expenses
$2,324,400
Assets
$4,675,196
Liabilities
$807,685

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHAEL HADLAND (2ND VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MARY OLING-SISAY (PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD)
  • JULIE WADDELL (1ST VICE PRESIDENT)
  • YOUNES BENKACI (3RD VICE PRESIDENT)
  • BRANDON HARRISON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • BIZHAN ABDALI (DIRECTOR OF HR/OPERATIONS): $142,137 total reported compensation
  • BRANDON HARRISON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $82,527 total reported compensation
  • MELANIE TRIAS (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $24,847 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to bridge the digital divide in San Diego County by connecting and empowering under-served communities through affordable computers, device repair, digital skills and workforce development opportunities.

What it reported doing in 2025

San diego futures foundation's mission is to bridge the digital divide in san diego county by connecting and empowering under-served communities through affordable computers, device repairs, digital skills and workforce development opportunities. The low-cost computer program provides computers for the low cost of refurbishing, as well as repair and warranty services to qualified community members. Salvage program recycles computers and electronic equipment in an eco-friendly manner.since inception, the organization has provided more than 64,049 computers to san diego charitable organizations and individuals. These consist of donated equipment that has been refurbished and updated.

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 75% for direct work, and 25% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 61
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 67.1%; rating input score 67
  • Program expense ratio: 71.4%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 75th 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: 9 of 9 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: 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: 8.2%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.01; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.17; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.3%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.6% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.6% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.9% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 7 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 67.1% of revenue deployed · 71.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $142K · 16 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $259K reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 51/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 58/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 30/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 38/100.