Columbia Gorge Community College Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
930740519
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
The Dalles, OR, USA
Phone
5415066104
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Foundations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$602,015
Expenses
$442,968
Assets
$3,523,359
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SUSAN DAVIS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • MARY GUMM (PRESIDENT)
  • ERICA FLORES (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • SUSAN DAVIS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $135,214 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 foundation connects with students, donors, and the community to support scholarships, programs and initiatives that improve the accessibility and quality of education at columbia gorge community college.

What it reported doing in 2024

The foundation partially sponsors a math day every year, organized and put on by the chair of the college math department. This program targets 5th - 12th graders throughout the region. The foundation gives annual awards to recognize exemplary performance in the academic year. These are awarded by the associated student government based on nominations by students, staff, and faculty. The foundation serves as a pass-through for donations for specific departments or programs within columbia gorge community college.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 76% 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.
  • 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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 77
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69.4%; rating input score 69
  • Program expense ratio: 79.4%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 26.4%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.95; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 30.5%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.8% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 69.4% of revenue deployed · 79.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $352K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $135K · 11 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.