Chicago Teachers Union Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237076885
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
3123299100
Rating
39
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,458,030
Expenses
$4,284,123
Assets
$41,748,148
Liabilities
$1,717,930

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STACY DAVIS-GATES (PRESIDENT)
  • JACKSON POTTER (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • STACY DAVIS-GATES (PRESIDENT): $218,586 total reported compensation
  • CHRISTEL WILLIAMS (RECORDING SECRETARY): $187,419 total reported compensation
  • MARIA T MORENO (FINANCIAL SECRETARY): $187,105 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 chicago teachers union foundation, inc. ("foundation") was organized for educational and social welfare purposes within the meaning of section 501 (c) (4) of the internal revenue code. The foundation's civic and charitable purposes include the following: support of projects, programs, community organizations and other not-for-profit organizations that provide services to improve and assist public schools, teachers and their dependents and retired teachers, including financial assistance for eligible elderly and retired chicago public school teachers.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 33
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 14
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 46.7%; rating input score 47
  • Program expense ratio: 21.6%; rating input score 22
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th 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: 85.5%; rating input score 85; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -74.3%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 9.74; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.5%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -5.6% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -17.3% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.6% per year; rating input score 100; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 46.7% of revenue deployed · 21.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 4 board members independent · 3 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $925K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $219K · 6 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 6 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 47/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 22/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.