The Not Impossible Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
451601262
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2016, Form 990-N 2013
Location
Venice, CA, USA
Phone
3105779963
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Neurology, Neuroscience

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$261,428
Expenses
$180,835
Assets
$1,691,618
Liabilities
$14,333

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MIKE BLACKER (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • MIKE BLACKER (PRESIDENT)
  • KAREN DIENER (BOARD MEMBER)
  • JOHN JACOBS (BOARD MEMBER)

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

The not impossible foundation fuels technology for the sake of humanity through entrepreneurship, innovation and story.

What it reported doing in 2024

Not impossible institute: the mission of the not impossible institute is to empower people to shape their future and the future. We work with organizations to build the confidence, capacity, and skills of their communities to identify impossible challenges that hold them back and transition them from impossible to not impossible. Not impossible changemakers are equipped with the tools necessary to turn visionary ideas into action that revolutionize companies, and industries, and drive human impact.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 89% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 84% 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 36
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 79
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 37.3%; rating input score 37
  • Program expense ratio: 45.3%; rating input score 45
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 40.2%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 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: 30.8%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 9.35; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -8.2% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.1% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 25.8% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 37.3% of revenue deployed · 45.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $82K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 23 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 37/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 45/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 40/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 47/100.