The Hawk Institute

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
462049487
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2019, Form 990-N 2016
Location
Sacramento, CA, USA
Phone
9162178071
Rating
62
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Development Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$522,963
Expenses
$549,490
Assets
$46,168
Liabilities
$-25,298

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Eric Gravenberg (President)
  • Martin Veal (Vice President)
  • Gabriel Simien (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Eric Gravenberg (President): $84,813 total reported compensation
  • Richard Nelson (Treasurer): $39,400 total reported compensation
  • Martin Veal (Vice President): $21,150 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To train a cadre of courageous leaders committed to their own personal success, and removing the barriers of inequality that have contributed to the systematic under education of African American young men.

What it reported doing in 2024

Bridge To The Future is a career awareness, financial capability and entrepreneurship preparatory program conducted by The Hawk Institute. This highly interactive program is designed to expose youth to different career options, provide the tools and resources to prepare them for those careers, enhance their financial capabilities, develop business skills and give them a competitive edge as they develop their business ideas and products. This program is truly next level training and development.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 95% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 9
  • Sustainability: 13
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.8%; rating input score 84
  • Program expense ratio: 79.8%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 22
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -5.1%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.08; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 28.8%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 27.5% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 20.1% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.8% of revenue deployed · 79.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 5 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $438K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $85K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 9 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 24/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.