We Are Somebody Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
992090101
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2023
Location
Cleveland, OH, USA
Phone
8885035528
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$94,704
Expenses
$69,864
Assets
$28,027
Liabilities
$3,187

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

People named in this filing

  • NINA TURNER (DIRCTOR)
  • TARA MOSLEY (DIRCTOR)
  • AMY VILELA (DIRCTOR)

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 organization aims to promote social, economic, and environmental justice causes through direct worker contact via training, education, and outreach. Our focus is to raise the consciousness of the working class to provide and spread solidarity among all people. We will do this by providing training to working-class people to inspire direct actions, fund efforts that aim to raise the working class consciousness and collaborate with partner organizations to work towards increasing union density. The activity of the organization will be conducted by the officers, board members, staff, and volunteers throughout the united states.

What it reported doing in 2024

Managed a community-focused outreach initiative that knocked on 34,231 doors to distribute election information and educational materials, ensuring that residents had access to accurate, non-partisan resources to support informed participation in Ohio.

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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 51
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 43.6%; rating input score 44
  • Program expense ratio: 59.1%; rating input score 59
  • Fundraising efficiency: $14.57 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 61; 61st 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: 26.2%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.4; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 43.6% of revenue deployed · 59.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $41K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 16 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 44/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 15/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.