Builders Exchange Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
311662183
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Columbus, OH, USA
Phone
6144869521
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$433,576
Expenses
$437,291
Assets
$6,956,550
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAN GEERS (PRESIDENT)
  • ERIC BULL (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • MARY TEBEAU (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARY TEBEAU (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $269,970 total reported compensation
  • KURT MOSHER (DIRECTOR OF FINANCE): $149,288 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 builders exchange foundation was established in 1999 as a philanthropic arm of the builders exchange of central Ohio. The mission of the foundation is to advance and support the commercial construction industry's education and research activities for the benefit of employers, employees, consumers and the community impacted by the commerical construction industry in central Ohio. The foundation is primarily dependent on the support of those closely affiliated with the local commercial construction industry.

What it reported doing in 2024

The foundation supports student outreach and awards scholarships to worthy college students and universities. In addition, the foundation supported the builders exchange of central Ohio by providing grants for professional development and membership materials.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 62% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. 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: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 79.5%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $26.89 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 25th 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: 97.7%; rating input score 98; 57th 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: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: -0.9%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 15.91; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.6%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.1% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.4% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 79.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $348K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $270K · 11 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • 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: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 37/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.