Butler Foundation Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 884302991
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2024–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2023
- Location
- Boston, MA, USA
- Phone
- 4408233208
- Rating
- 65
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Support N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $75,193
- Expenses
- $38,631
- Assets
- $40,257
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
9 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Patricia D Butler (Chief Executive Officer)
People named in this filing
- Patricia D Butler (Chief Executive Officer)
- Michael D Butler (Director)
- Jessica Ciocca (Director)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Butler Foundation, formed in memory of Kevin & Jay Butler, works to improve awareness, education, research, treatments and family support for Mesothelioma. It was originally formed in memory of Kevin J. Butler (1957 2006) who lost his battle with the disease in 2006. In 2009, Kevins older brother, John E. "Jay" (1949-2009), who had been fighting the disease for over 12 years, also succumbed to Mesothelioma. The Foundation works tirelessly to honor the legacies that both Jay and Kevin leave behind. Our goal is, and always will be, to remember Kevin and Jay while helping to find a cure for this rare and aggressive form of cancer.
What it reported doing in 2024
We organize and run an annual fundraiser-the Butler Foundation Kentucky Derby Part every May. From our proceeds, we give an annual donation to University of Vermont's Robert Larner, M.D. College of Medicine to Dr. Brian Cuniff for Mesothelioma Research.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filed totals do not add up.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 43
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 63
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 31.8%; rating input score 32
- Program expense ratio: 62%; rating input score 62
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 48.6%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.04; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 31.8% of revenue deployed · 62% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $24K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
- Consistency: 5 of 7 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 32/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part I part ii net assets crosscheck did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 47/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.