Santa Barbara Hacker Space Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
274120722
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2016–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Goleta, CA, USA
Phone
9516603380
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$136,261
Expenses
$79,589
Assets
$66,411
Liabilities
$429

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Michael Bales (President)

People named in this filing

  • Michael Kapusick (Member at Large)
  • Nick Winters (Member at Large)
  • Michael Bales (President)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Provide a fun and friendly setting for individuals to build, experiment and learn together, and to provide the community with access to space, tools and equipment.

What it reported doing in 2025

Santa Barbara Hackerspace hosted a series of free workshops throughout the year, focusing on STEM education, including topics such as 3D printing, electronics, Arduino programming, soldering, and basic CAD design. These workshops served students, educators, and community members of all ages and were aimed at fostering technical literacy and hands-on learning.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

STRONG - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Sustainability: 70
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 58.4%; rating input score 58
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 41.6%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.83; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.1% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 32.4% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 58.4% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $80K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2016 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 58/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 40/100.