Community Foundation Realty Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
204265927
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Baton Rouge, LA, USA
Phone
2253876126
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$186,777
Expenses
$209,244
Assets
$811,234
Liabilities
$32,484

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Edmund J Giering IV (President/Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Edmund J Giering IV (President/Director): $312,132 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

As a supporting organization of the Baton Rouge Area Foundation, this entity will benefit, perform the function of, and carry out the purposes of the Baton Rouge Area Foundation, specifically with respect to the acquisition, development, management and disposition of real estate assets donated to or otherwise acquired by the Foundation. These real estate assets are primarily engaged in economic development opportunities and the redevelopment of blighted areas of economically distressed communities.

What it reported doing in 2024

To support the Baton Rouge Area Foundation in its charitable purpose with grants and in regards to the acquisition, management, development and disposition of real estate assets.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
  • 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 85
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 97%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 19th 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 22nd 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: -12%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.88; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 36.3%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 79.6% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 61.1% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 97% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 6 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $203K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $312K · 5 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $136K reported
  • Consistency: 16 of 16 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 32 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 20/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 34/100.