W Haywood Burns Institute

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
810594086
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Beaverton, OR, USA
Phone
4153214100
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,849,954
Expenses
$6,082,111
Assets
$13,469,987
Liabilities
$1,875,385

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TSHAKA BARROWS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • SAMANTHA MELLERSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • MICHAEL FINLEY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MICHAEL FINLEY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $285,181 total reported compensation
  • SAMANTHA MELLERSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $268,047 total reported compensation
  • TSHAKA BARROWS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $242,626 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 haywood burns institute is a black-led national, non-profit with a diverse team of visionaries, working to transform the administration of justice by focusing on a community-centered approach to transformation, anchored in structural well-being.

What it reported doing in 2024

Structural well-being framework - centering community to establish self-directed solutions is critical to achieving transformational change and better life outcomes. Communities of color are not routinely engaged in the design and/or implementation of the solutions to achieve their own well-being. And sectors have repeatedly failed to make impactful sustainable change.bi has worked in 300+ jurisdictions nationally to support local efforts to eliminate racial and ethnic disparities. Over time, however, bi realized the limitations of "harm reduction and evolved to address the longstanding structural inequities with a cross-sector approach to design and achieve structural well-being.bi defines structural well-being as a system of public policies, institutional and inclusive practices, cultural representations, and other norms that work to strengthen families, communities and individual well-being for positive life outcomes. To dismantle the nation's current operational framework of structural racism, we must replace it with a structural well-being frame to provide families and communities what they need to thrive: a sense of belonging and community, and equitable access to the resources necessary for positive life outcomes.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69.7%; rating input score 70
  • Program expense ratio: 77%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $13.44 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 11.2%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.21; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.14; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 30.4%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 22.1% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 69.7% of revenue deployed · 77% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 8 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $285K · 16 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $132K reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 9 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 47/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 52/100.