Berkshire Taconic Community Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
061254469
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Sheffield, MA, USA
Phone
4132290370
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Foundations

Reported finances

Revenue
$25,442,434
Expenses
$21,373,096
Assets
$251,810,187
Liabilities
$1,195,355

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

Leadership & pay

29 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PETER TAYLOR (PRESIDENT & CEO, THRU 9/2024)
  • KATHERINE MIKULICH INTERIM (PRESIDENT & CEO, EFF. 9/2024)

Highest reported compensation

  • KATHERINE MIKULICH INTERIM (PRESIDENT & CEO, EFF. 9/2024): $212,546 total reported compensation
  • PETER TAYLOR (PRESIDENT & CEO, THRU 9/2024): $204,864 total reported compensation
  • JOSEPH BAKER (VP FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION): $196,427 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To connect donors with causes, build permanent community resources, and strenghthen nonprofit organizations to improve the quality of life in berkshire, ma; columbia & ne dutchess, ny and nw litchfield, ct counties.

What it reported doing in 2024

Regional philanthropy: provided charitable support for specific geographic areas within the region we serve, and fund administration for related supporting organizations serving the community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 82% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 80% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 91
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 82
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 90.3%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $15.18 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 87.2%; rating input score 87; 19th 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 16%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 11.78; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.3%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.8% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 90.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 23 of 23 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $19.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $213K · 29 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $131K reported
  • Consistency: 36 of 38 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 386 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 382 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 50/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.