Arctic Slope Community Foundation Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 272247740
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-T 2025
- Location
- Anchorage, AK, USA
- Phone
- 9073396026
- Rating
- 85
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Public Foundations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,529,912
- Expenses
- $2,925,679
- Assets
- $8,705,456
- Liabilities
- $789,265
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Laura Patkotak (President)
- Edna Ahmaogak (Vice President)
Highest reported compensation
- Patuk Glenn (Executive Dir.): $209,230 total reported compensation
- Ronald Panigeo (CFO): $204,903 total reported compensation
- Ryan Cope (Director of Grant): $135,076 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Strengthen our culture of giving and improve the quality on life among the people of the Arctic Slope region of Alaska by providing and administering grants to support the community health and economic stability of the villages of Point Hope, Point Lay, Wainwright, Atqasuk, Barrow, Nuiqsut, Anaktuvuk Pass, and Kaktovik.
What it reported doing in 2025
Providing and administering grants to support the community health and economic stability of the villages of Point Hope, Point Lay, Wainwright, Atqasuk, Utqiagvik, Nuiqsut, Anaktuvuk Pass, and Kaktovik. The Arctic Slope Community Foundation will leverage the charitable resources of individuals, business, public and private foundations, and other charities to make grants to support community-based solutions and serve the people of the Arctic Slope.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 79% for direct work, and 21% for grants.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 88
- Transparency & Controls: 76
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 31
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 96.1%; rating input score 96
- Program expense ratio: 73.3%; rating input score 73
- Fundraising efficiency: $220.09 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 76.1%; rating input score 76; 26th 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: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -15.6%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.98; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 18.8%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 12.6% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 96.1% of revenue deployed · 73.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $209K · 8 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $314K reported
- Consistency: 35 of 36 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 14 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 11 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.
- 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.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 6/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 50/100.