Community Foundation Donor Directed Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
830313321
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2018
Forms available
Form 990 2018
Location
Jackson, WY, USA
Phone
3077391026
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Foundations

Reported finances

Revenue
$31,357
Expenses
$356,237
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

25 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KATHARINE CONOVER (President & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • KATHARINE CONOVER (President & CEO): $286,628 total reported compensation
  • KAREN COLEMAN (EXEC VP & CFO): $264,427 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The community foundation donor directed fund (the organization) is a type 1 supporting organization for the community foundation of jackson hole (cfjh) and makes grants to other not-for-profits. Cfjh works to promote philanthropy and create opportunities to improve the welfare of the world around us by inspiring and mobilizing our community and its resources. The organization was dissolved as of december 31, 2018.

What it reported doing in 2018

The community foundation donor directed fund is a type 1 supporting organization for the community foundation of jackson hole (cfjh) and makes grants to other not-for-profits. Cfjh works to promote philanthropy and create opportunities to improve the welfare of the world around us by inspiring and mobilizing our community and its resources.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 97% 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 most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and the required major-donor schedule is missing or incomplete.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 56
  • Accountability: 97
  • Sustainability: 4
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 11th 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: 90.7%; rating input score 91; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: No; rating input score 0
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 95.5%; rating input score 95; 27th 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: -1,036.1%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.1%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 25.6% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3.9% per year; rating input score 0; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -7.3% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 21 of 22 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $356K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $287K · 25 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 11 of 12 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2010 to 2018
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 9 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: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Major donor itemization scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.