Urban Movement Labs

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
851767014
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
6199177478
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Transportation Systems

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$438,431
Expenses
$762,864
Assets
$48,144
Liabilities
$10,004

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SAM MORRISSEY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (UNTIL 07/22))

Highest reported compensation

  • ROGELIO PARDO (PROGRAM DIRECTOR): $138,461 total reported compensation
  • CLINT HARPER (URBAN AIR MOBILITY FELLOW): $127,845 total reported compensation
  • SAM MORRISSEY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (UNTIL 07/22)): $125,577 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Urban movement labs links government, businesses, and communities to match technology solutions to mobility problems by testing them in real urban conditions in los angeles and eventually a larger geographic area.

What it reported doing in 2022

Urban air mobility collaboration with ladot resulting in an integration manual for city planning and a conops exploring operations of uam technology in los angeles.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 6
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 95.7%; rating input score 96
  • Program expense ratio: 55%; rating input score 55
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.41 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -74%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.06; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 51.4%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 90.8% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -9.6% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -83.4% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 95.7% of revenue deployed · 55% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $420K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $138K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2020 to 2022
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 55/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 42/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 21/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.