Children and Teachers Foundation of the Chicago Teachers Union

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
465340132
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2023
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
3123299100
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,170,581
Expenses
$1,153,470
Assets
$394,861
Liabilities
$3,276,694

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

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

Highest reported compensation

  • CHRISTEL WILLIAMS (RECORDING SECRETARY): $213,414 total reported compensation
  • STACY DAVIS GATES (PRESIDENT): $210,111 total reported compensation
  • LYNN CHERKASKY-DAVIS (DIRECTOR OF NTL): $187,907 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 children & teachers foundation of the chicago teachers union ("foundation") was organized for charitable and educational purposes within the meaning of section 501(c)(3) of the internal revenue code. The foundation's civic and chartiable purposes include the following: providing assistance to chicago public school employees and their families, (including retired employees), providing assistance to chicago public schools children and their families, supporting charitable and educational activities, supporting initiatives and programs of the general community, the chicago teachers union and the chicago public schools.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 86% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 67% for direct work, and 33% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 62
  • Accountability: 25
  • Sustainability: 24
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 95.7%; rating input score 96
  • Program expense ratio: 97.1%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 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: 64.9%; rating input score 65; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 20%; rating input score 20; 9th 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: 1.5%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.34; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 8.3; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 59.5%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 17.4% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 25.2% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 95.7% of revenue deployed · 97.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $213K · 8 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 9 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 8 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 20/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 40/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.