Chris Long Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 476329563
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2024–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-PF 2023
- Location
- St Louis, MO, USA
- Phone
- 3147262300
- Rating
- 76
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Private Grantmaking Foundations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,348,913
- Expenses
- $1,269,436
- Assets
- $724,826
- Liabilities
- $52,430
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- NANCY E HOPKINS (EXEC DIRECTO): $123,200 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 mission of the foundation is to mobilize champions, service providers, and experts to help communities access clean water, address basic needs for youth and families, and inspire others to make an impact at home and abroad. The foundation's vision is access and opportunity everywhere.
What it reported doing in 2024
Edzone is the foundation's program that supports educational equity and opportunity. The foundation has identified organizations that focus on making quality education easily accessible to underserved youth, including through the provision of essential needs item and scholarships. These organizations are the edzone initiative's benefitting partner organizations, and they are based in three communities in which chris long played during his collegiate and nfl career: charlottesville, philadelphia, and st. Louis. In partnership with its athlete ambassadors, the foundation also promotes early literacy for young children in elementary schools across the country, building a love of reading among students and excitement and awareness among partners and caregivers around the role they play in raising readers. The program focuses specifically on reading at grade level by fourth grade to address the documented connection between fourth grade reading proficiency and long-term academic success and high school graduation.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 73% of its reported program spending out as grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 69
- Transparency & Controls: 88
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 42
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 71.6%; rating input score 72
- Program expense ratio: 75.5%; rating input score 75
- Fundraising efficiency: $8.81 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 5.9%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.57; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 9.7%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 71.6% of revenue deployed · 75.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $958K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $123K · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 21 filed money-flow records
- 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 34/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 52/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 38/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 47/100.