Delaware Valley Legacy Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
232802171
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Philadelphia, PA, USA
Phone
2155636417
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Foundations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$66,368
Expenses
$112,910
Assets
$1,121,998
Liabilities
$7,695

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHAEL GROSBERG (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • MICHAEL GROSBERG (PRESIDENT)
  • KARL MICHELFELDER (VICE PRESIDE)
  • WILLIAM LEFFLER (TREASURER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Dvlf has been serving the emerging needs of the lgbtq community for 32 years. The organization was created to benefit the philadelphia region's lgbtq community by raising money for a permanent endowment. Dvlf fosters positive change every year through advocacy, grantmaking, scholarships, programming and education. This year, dvlf's significantly increased its grantmaking to include even more grants and scholarships. Each year, dvlf empowers and enhances the lives of the lgbtq community by investing in community work. It's critical mission provides services to programs serving the lgbtq community.

What it reported doing in 2024

Dvlf has been serving the emerging needs of the lgbt community for 32 years. The organization was created to benefit the philadelphia region's lgbtq community by raising money for a permanent endowment. Dvlf fosters positive change every year through advocacy, grantmaking, scholarships, programming and education. This year, dvlf's significantly increased its grantmaking to include even more grants and scholarships. Each year, dvlf empowers and enhances the lives of the lgbtq community by investing in community work. It's critical mission provides services to programs serving the lgbtq community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 75% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 73.1%; rating input score 73
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 44.2%; rating input score 44; 44th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: -70.1%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 9.94; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 73.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $82K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 26 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 44/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 42/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 25/100.
  • 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.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.