Charles & Audrey Dann Charitable Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
364018189
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
3123574790
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Philanthropy, Voluntarism, and Grantmaking Foundations N.E.C.
Affiliation
Judaism

Reported finances

Revenue
$200,070
Expenses
$179,259
Assets
$1,398,299
Liabilities
$3,625

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JULIE DANN SCHNEIDER (PRESIDENT)
  • LONNIE NASATIR (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ROBERT DANN (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • LONNIE NASATIR (VICE PRESIDENT): $668,514 total reported compensation
  • DAVID S ROSEN (TREASURER): $558,732 total reported compensation
  • JAMES A PINKSTON (ASSISTANT TREASURER): $365,057 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 foundation is organized to foster, promote, support, develop, encourage, and maintain the broad charitable, educational, and/or religious purposes of the jewish federation of metropolitan chicago and the foundation as authorized in their by-laws.

What it reported doing in 2024

The foundation makes grants to charitable organizations which are tax-exempt under the irc section 501(c)(3) and meet the guidelines of the charter of the jewish federation of metropolitan chicago and the by-laws of the foundation.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 56
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 95.5%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 19th 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: 86.6%; rating input score 87; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 40%; rating input score 40; 15th 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: 10.4%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.8; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 151.4%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.3% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.5% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.4% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 95.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $171K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $669K · 6 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 43 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.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 40/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.