The Columbus Foundation
Legal name: Columbus Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 316044264
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2024–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Columbus, OH, USA
- Phone
- 614/251-4000
- Rating
- 81
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Community Foundations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $411,632,853
- Expenses
- $272,733,262
- Assets
- $2,783,783,271
- Liabilities
- $23,436,293
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
18 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DOUGLAS F KRIDLER (PRESIDENT & CEO)
- SCOTT G HEITKAMP (VICE PRESIDENT & CFO)
- ANGELA G PARSONS (VICE PRESIDENT OF DSD)
- DAN SHARPE (VICE PRESIDENT CRGM)
- GREGG OOSTERBAAN (VICE PRESIDENT OF INFORMAT)
Highest reported compensation
- DOUGLAS F KRIDLER (PRESIDENT & CEO): $1,012,706 total reported compensation
- SCOTT G HEITKAMP (VICE PRESIDENT & CFO): $381,890 total reported compensation
- ANGELA G PARSONS (VICE PRESIDENT OF DSD): $325,049 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Our Mission** To assist donors and others in strengthening and improving our community for the benefit of all its residents. Our Promise** To help you help others through the most effective philanthropy possible. Accreditations. OUR PROMISE. The first unsolicited gift of $25 was given to The Columbus Foundation by Olga Anna Jones, a teacher, an editor of the Ohio Women Voter, and Columbus' first city councilwoman. From the start, the Foundation has been supported by individuals giving what they can, small and large, for the betterment of the community and all its people. **Today, the Foundation serves as a trusted philanthropic advisor in all types of giving—helping individuals, families, and businesses achieve their charitable goals. Present: Partners in...
What it reported doing in 2024
Advancing philanthropy
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 79% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 97% of its reported program spending out as grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filed totals do not add up.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 91
- Transparency & Controls: 67
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 90
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 90.3%; rating input score 90
- Program expense ratio: 97%; rating input score 97
- Fundraising efficiency: $81.74 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
- Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
- Requires narrative reports: Fail
- Conducts field audits: Fail
- May suspend future funding: Fail
- Requires financial reports: Fail
- Conducts site visits: Fail
- Requires grant agreements: Fail
- May require repayment: Fail
- Grant itemization coverage: 98.7%; rating input score 99; 36th 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; 77th 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: 33.7%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 10.21; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 1.2%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 90.3% of revenue deployed · 97% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 9 filed program accomplishments · $264.5M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $1M · 18 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.4M reported
- Consistency: 37 of 39 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1756 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 1774 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.