Evanston Community Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 363466802
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2020
- Location
- Evanston, IL, USA
- Phone
- 8474920990
- Rating
- 82
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Community Foundations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $7,573,677
- Expenses
- $5,361,606
- Assets
- $44,660,002
- Liabilities
- $14,228,160
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
27 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- KIMBERLY HOLMES-ROSS (Executive Director EC2C as of 3/24)
- SOL ANDERSON (PRESIDENT AND CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- SOL ANDERSON (PRESIDENT AND CEO): $192,870 total reported compensation
- KIMBERLY HOLMES-ROSS (Executive Director EC2C as of 3/24): $140,765 total reported compensation
- CYNTHIA DOMINGUEZ (COO as of 10/24): $140,174 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The evanston community foundation mobilizes community resources to drive systemic social change and build a thriving, resilient evanston. We achieve this by: investing in community with a long-term and sustainable perspective, empowering leaders to foster innovation and collaboration, and prioritizing community voice and choice.
What it reported doing in 2024
Through its grantmaking the foundation distributes resources through local organizations for public good. Since 2020 we've adapted grantmaking to meet community need, including adding opportunities to support collective and enduring initiatives and providing operating support. We will continue to listen to community to keep our grantmaking focused on supporting community priorities.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 80% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 68% 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 74
- Transparency & Controls: 78
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 72
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 72.4%; rating input score 72
- Program expense ratio: 83.3%; rating input score 83
- Fundraising efficiency: $17.7 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 85.5%; rating input score 86; 23rd 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; 63rd 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: 29.2%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 8.33; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.32; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 14.6%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 7.8% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 72.4% of revenue deployed · 83.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 21 of 21 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $4.5M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $193K · 27 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 110 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 101 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 56/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.