Seachange Capital Partners Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 205124665
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- New York, NY, USA
- Phone
- 8448697842
- Rating
- 83
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Fund Raising and Fund Distribution
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $3,735,687
- Expenses
- $3,267,486
- Assets
- $9,803,151
- Liabilities
- $1,551,913
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
15 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Minji Kim (Vice President)
Highest reported compensation
- JOHN MACINTOSH (MNG PARTNER): $229,880 total reported compensation
- TAJREENA TABASSOOM (PARTNER): $191,897 total reported compensation
- Lindsay Kijewski (PARTNER): $158,353 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Seachange supports nonprofits facing complex financial and organizationalchallenges. We do this with grants, loans, consulting, and research to educate nonprofits, funders, and other stakeholders. Seachange also works to build effective connections between funders and nonprofits on the associated issues. We focus in four areas: in mergers and sustained collaboration, we support nonprofits that already have aserious interest in coming togetheror in exploring how they mightby covering aportion of the costs of exploring or completing the transaction. We manage fourgrantmaking programsthe seachange-lodestar fund for nonprofit collaboration, the New York merger and collaboration fund, the greater philadelphia nonprofit repositioning fund, and the transformational partnerships fund (with a focus on higher education) that provide funding to encourage and support mergers, acquisitions, joint ventures, and other types of formal, sustained collaborations between nonprofits. Seachange is a foundin
What it reported doing in 2024
Seachange supports nonprofits facing complex financial and organizational challenges. We do this with grants, loans, consulting, and research to educate nonprofits, funders, and other stakeholders. Seachange also works to build effective connections between funders and nonprofits on the associated issues.seachange launched in early 2008 with support from the bill & melinda gates foundation, omidyar network, the william and flora hewlett foundation, the surdna foundation, goldman sachs, and a group of individual philanthropists. After an initial focus on education and youth development through the catalyst fund (2008-2016), seachange expanded into sustained collaboration with the seachange-lodestar fund for nonprofit collaboration (2009-present), the New York merger and collaboration fund (nymac, 2012-present), the greater philadelphia nonprofit repositioning fund (nonprofit repositioning fund, 2018-present), and the transformational partnerships fund (2020-present); into credit with the contact fund (2013-present), the seachange special impact fund llc (sif, 2020-present), the New York pooled pri fund (nypri, 2014-present), and New York shelter acquisition and predevelopment fund, llc (nysapf, 2023-present); and into impact investing with the New York impact opportunities fund, llc (2021-present). Nypri, the contact fund, nysapf, and sif are separate legal entities; seachange serves as the managing member of nypri and nysapf, as the sole member of sif, and manages the contact fund pursuant to a management services agreement. Nymac, the seachange-lodestar fund for nonprofit collaboration, the nonprofit repositioning fund, and the transformational partnerships fund are grantmaking programs of seachange that are referred to as funds because each has a distinct set of philanthropic funders to whom certain governance rights have been granted. None of these four grantmaking programs are distinct legal entities. In 2011, seachange began providing analysis and advice (i.e., consulting) in response to requests from nonprofits and funders. Our work will continue to evolve in response to changes in the environment, feedback from the market, and reflection on our accomplishments and challenges. Seachange also regularly releases reports analyzing major issues for the nonprofit sector, as well as opinion pieces in various publications.during 2024, seachange made grants to support 48 sustained collaboration grants: nrf (14), nymac (11), sc-ls (16), tpf (7) compared to 42 total grants funded in 2023. Seachange had a staff of 8 full-time employees in 2024 and 8 in 2023.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 82% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 49% for direct work, and 51% for grants.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration and some filed totals do not add up.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 79
- Transparency & Controls: 80
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 60
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 75.1%; rating input score 75
- Program expense ratio: 83.9%; rating input score 84
- Fundraising efficiency: $86.97 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 17th 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: 96.7%; rating input score 97; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 21st 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: 12.5%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.16; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 25.8%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 6.4% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 75.1% of revenue deployed · 83.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 10 of 11 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $230K · 15 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 52 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 — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 49/100.