Emma L Wilson King Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
522447831
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2020
Location
East Saint Louis, IL, USA
Phone
8184454163
Rating
62
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Historical Societies, Related Historical Activities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$63,310
Expenses
$48,273
Assets
$684,136
Liabilities
$53,189

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

31 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Mia M King (President)
  • Percy McKinney (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Barbara Curtis Billops (Board Member)
  • Bernice Sanders (Board Member)
  • Edna Farmer (Board Member)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

A civic and educational Foundation for the enhancement of neighborhoods in the community of East St. Louis, Il. The Foundation is a volunteer nonprofit organization committed to improving key elements of the city such a parks, gardens and buildings. The education committee's function is to provide annual scholarship awards to high school seniors and new coat awards to elementary and middle schools. Projects and activities are designed to encourage youths to a higher level of excellent. Each year the committee award new coats and scholarships to three districts in the Metro-East area. School district 189, East St. Louis, School district 188 Love Joy and School District 187, Cahokia. A festival is done once a year providing free mechanic rides, inflatables and entertainment for all that attend. In 2025 more than 4,000 children and adults attended the event.

What it reported doing in 2025

The education committee provides annual scholarship to seniors in three school districts 187, 188 and 189. In 2025 seven graduating students were given scholarships for a total of $5,800.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 30
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 64
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 36.8%; rating input score 37
  • Program expense ratio: 28.8%; rating input score 29
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 23.8%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 14.17; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 22.9% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.1% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 36.8% of revenue deployed · 28.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 31 of 31 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $14K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 31 people listed
  • Consistency: 41 of 42 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2021 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 37/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 29/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 15/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.