Behind the Bench Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
137039633
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
9174720539
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Private Grantmaking Foundations

Reported finances

Revenue
$50,886
Expenses
$34,747
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MIA WRIGHT (PRESIDENT AND DIRECTOR)
  • TOMI ROSE (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • MIA WRIGHT (PRESIDENT AND DIRECTOR)
  • TOMI ROSE (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • DONNA M HARRIS-LEWIS (TREASURER)

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 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide services and assistance

What it reported doing in 2016

Unrestricted donation to sickkids, 555 university ave, toronto, ontario, canada.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 81% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 71% for direct work, and 29% for grants.

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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 43
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 37.2%; rating input score 37
  • Program expense ratio: 49.5%; rating input score 50
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.87 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 80%; rating input score 80; 1st 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 31.7%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 150% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -56% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -118.3% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 37.2% of revenue deployed · 49.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $17K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 11 of 13 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2014 to 2016
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 37/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 50/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 52/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grants require schedule f did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.