Cheboygan County Community Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
274252353
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2016
Location
Cheboygan, MI, USA
Phone
2313336191
Rating
89
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Foundations

Reported finances

Revenue
$83,451
Expenses
$74,986
Assets
$121,600
Liabilities
$28,035

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANNETTE EUSTICE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • DAVID BUTTS (CHAIRPERSON)
  • DAWN M BODNAR (VICE CHAIRPERSON)
  • BRYAN GROFF (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Our purpose is to provide a federal and state qualified tax exempt foundation for residents and friends of cheboygan county to donate income and assets which are federal and state tax deductible. Funds donated to the cheboygan communities foundation are then used to support projects which create jobs, improve local educational opportunities, increase tourism visits, expand retail and commercial offerings, and enhance the overall economic health of cheboygan county.

What it reported doing in 2024

The foundation provides grants, scholarships, and other means of financial support for individuals, companies, organizations, and projects which support our mission and purpose.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 45% for direct work, and 55% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Liabilities are high compared with assets and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 79.3%; rating input score 79
  • Program expense ratio: 88.2%; rating input score 88

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: 10.1%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.62; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.23; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.6% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 79.3% of revenue deployed · 88.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $66K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 13/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.