America's Newspapers Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
932020527
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Tallahassee, FL, USA
Phone
8472829850
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$672,741
Expenses
$674,587
Assets
$194,013
Liabilities
$69,558

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHRIS REEN (PRESIDENT)
  • ALAN FISCO (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • DEAN RIDINGS (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • DEAN RIDINGS (CEO): $318,073 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 mission of the america's newspapers foundation is to support and promote initiatives for local newspapers. The initiatives provide needed training, assets and best practices to newspaper owners, managers, and staffs, helping to ensure that newspapers remain a vital part of their local communities.

What it reported doing in 2024

The foundation contracted with coda ventures llc to conduct 2 studies that would provide valuable data to local newspapers. 1) national survey conducted to determine the trust that americans have in political news that is provided by newspapers, tv and radio. The result will be presentd in a single sheet highlighting the trust in newspapers when covering political newspapers to be used by members of an with the goal of providng insights for articles and editorials. 2) national study and data by region regarding americans' use and engagement with local businesses and the role newspapers and newspaper advertising play in reaching those consumers. The study provided insight and guidance to local newspapers on which advertising will appeal to the consumers during various seasons. The reseach included statistics on positively reaching consumers in various areas such as home & garden, valentine sales, healthcare, and fitness. An has developed sales and marketing tools for local newspapers including webinars and research on various areas to educate local businesses that newspapers are their best advertising partner.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 40% for direct work, and 60% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 59
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 62%; rating input score 62
  • Program expense ratio: 61.8%; rating input score 62
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.29 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.3%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.29; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.36; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.6%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 113.5% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 42.3% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 62% of revenue deployed · 61.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $417K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $318K · 13 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 39/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 35/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 13/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 21/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 54/100.