Beautiful Foundation Fund Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
464959207
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017, Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Raleigh, NC, USA
Phone
4048310281
Rating
52
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Private Grantmaking Foundations

Reported finances

Revenue
$328,627
Expenses
$42,667
Assets
$759,241
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GREGORY V JONES (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • GREGORY V JONES (PRESIDENT)
  • GREGORY L LAMB (VICE PRESIDE)
  • DR TIMOTHY COOK (SECRETARY)

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 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

We are a public charity 170(b) (1) (a) (vi)

What it reported doing in 2017

Publis serice

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 100% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

MIXED - Most voting board members are independent and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 41
  • Transparency & Controls: 50
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 93
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 13%; rating input score 13
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 87%; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 17.79; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 94.4% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 99.3% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 13% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 2 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $43K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 11 of 11 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes foreign activity
  • 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.

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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 13/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.