Thunder Fellows Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
871046645
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Oklahoma City, OK, USA
Phone
9189227091
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$421,540
Expenses
$376,774
Assets
$2,198,310
Liabilities
$246,910

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Cedric Ikpo (Executive Dir.): $150,182 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The Thunder Fellows Program, developed by the Oklahoma City Thunder and Creative Arts Agency (CAA), aims to unlock new opportunities in sports, entertainment, and technology for black high school and college students in the Tulsa area.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Thunder Fellows program is dedicated to empowering Black high school and college students by providing them with access to education and professional development in the fields of sports, entertainment, and technology. The comprehensive curriculum is designed to equip scholars with the skills and knowledge necessary to excel in these industries. By directly addressing the underrepresentation of Black individuals in tech fields, Thunder Fellows aims to increase their presence and infuse diverse experiences and perspectives in decision-making roles. Through hands-on learning experiences, mentorship, and real-world projects, students gain a competitive edge, build robust professional networks, and prepare for high-paying careers in an ever-growing, STEM-centric society.

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

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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 52
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 54.5%; rating input score 55
  • Program expense ratio: 64.7%; rating input score 65
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 10.6%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.83; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.5%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 19.2% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 21.4% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 62.9% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 54.5% of revenue deployed · 64.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $244K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $150K · 10 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2021 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 55/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 25/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 36/100.