The National Urban Technology Center Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
133826279
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2125287350
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Reported finances

Revenue
$191,763
Expenses
$154,326
Assets
$1,337,767
Liabilities
$930,393

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PATRICIA BRANSFORD (President)
  • THOMAS BRANSFORD (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • PATRICIA BRANSFORD (President)
  • THOMAS BRANSFORD (Vice President)
  • KATHY BRANSFORD ZUCKERMAN (Director)

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

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

Overview

Mission

To provide access to personal computers and information technology in under-served communities to address the widening technology gap in the "information have-nots".

What it reported doing in 2024

Contracts for customized software development

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 95% 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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 49
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 75
  • Sustainability: 69
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 50.4%; rating input score 50
  • Program expense ratio: 62.6%; rating input score 63
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 22nd 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: 77.8%; rating input score 78; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 19.5%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 8.67; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.7; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -10.5% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -5.8% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.3% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 50.4% of revenue deployed · 62.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 9 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $97K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • 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 50/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 8/100.