Techbridge Girls

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
274162514
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Sacramento, CA, USA
Phone
5109982242
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$780,731
Expenses
$2,482,750
Assets
$3,144,538
Liabilities
$151,686

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Marcia Reynolds (Vice President, Finance and Operations)
  • Savita Raj (CEO (Part Year))

Highest reported compensation

  • Marcia Reynolds (Vice President, Finance and Operations): $168,473 total reported compensation
  • Savita Raj (CEO (Part Year)): $140,933 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Techbridge Girls prepares out-of-school time STEM educators and volunteer STEM professionals with training and curricula to promote access, belonging, and persistence in STEM.

What it reported doing in 2024

TBG is dedicated to re-engineering the STEM ecosystem to address limited access to and inadequate preparation for STEM pathway participants across the nation. We provide out-of-school time educators and volunteer STEM professionals with training and specialized curricula, preparing them to serve as catalysts for STEM engagement. For more than two decades, TBG has developed award-winning, innovative, relevant STEM curricula that helps participants recognize their unique STEM potential and prepares them for success in these fields.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 85% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 24
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 75.1%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1.99 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: -218%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.27; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.5%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 75.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $168K · 13 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $220K reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 6/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 50/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Fund balance restriction sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 29/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 52/100.