The Cincy Hat Foundation

Legal name: Cincy Hat Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
994143088
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Cincinnati, OH, USA
Phone
3175137595
Rating
59
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Sheltered Employment

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$373,895
Expenses
$137,371
Assets
$262,378
Liabilities
$25,854

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • THEODORE KARRAS (PRESIDENT)
  • MATTHEW RENIE (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MATTHEW RENIE (VICE PRESIDENT): $32,295 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 Cincy Hat Foundation is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization dedicated to raising funds to support adults with developmental disabilities, in partnership with Village of Merici and the University of Cincinnati Transition and Access Pathways (TAP) program.

What it reported doing in 2024

The organization provided $76,000 in funding for two full-ride scholarships for students with idd through the university of cincinnati's transition and access program (tap). In addition, the foundation donated $2,000 to the ken anderson alliance to support their mission of creating life, work, and engagement opportunities for adults with idd. Both contributions advance the organization's commitment to inclusion, empowerment, and long-term impact for individuals with idd in the community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 91% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. 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: 35
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 67
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 28.3%; rating input score 28
  • Program expense ratio: 56.8%; rating input score 57
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th 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: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 63.3%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.91; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 23.5%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 28.3% of revenue deployed · 56.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $78K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $32K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 28/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.