The Thinking Project
Legal name: The Thinking Project Institute
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 822269798
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2017–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Jul 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2023, Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2016
- Location
- Philadelphia, PA, US
- Phone
- 7204210009
- Rating
- 89
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Educational Services and Schools - Other
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $80,544
- Expenses
- $155,195
- Assets
- $22,246
- Liabilities
- $1,870
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- RACHEL PICKETT (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- RACHEL PICKETT (PRESIDENT)
- MICHAEL BORTNIK (BOARD CHAIR)
- DANA ANDERSON (SECRETARY)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To bring Inquiry to every student, everywhere.
What it reported doing in 2024
Diagnosed the "fizzle" barriers to sustained, scaleable practice: despite consistently positive initial ibsr sessions -- many lasting 45 minutes to an hour -- we observed that the experience often did not translate into sustained participation across a five-session arc. Drawing on our own implementation data and social-emotional learning (sel) implementation research, we identified the recurring barriers that affect us and sel programs broadly: time scarcity, competing priorities, and scheduling and logistical friction. These pressures impact effective scaling: across the research, the small, high-fidelity conditions that produced positive impact stopped replicating it as programs scaled into the time-scarce contexts of whole schools and districts, with their competing priorities and unpredictable schedules. We also studied the factors more likely to support resilient, ongoing uptake and growth, such as quick wins, adaptability to local context, and repeatability. This diagnosis gave us a growth-research foundation and design guide for the resource and delivery testing we pursued in fy25.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 87
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 10
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 65%; rating input score 65
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -92.7%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.14; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 69.8%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 42.6% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 8.9% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 65% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $101K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2017 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.