Gateway Equity Institute
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 311787746
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2011
- Location
- Saint Louis, MO, USA
- Phone
- 3142463146
- Rating
- 74
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Civil Rights
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $141,322
- Expenses
- $200,014
- Assets
- $114,618
- Liabilities
- $76,432
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
18 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Rhonda Carter Adams (Executive Director)
Highest reported compensation
- Rhonda Carter Adams (Executive Director): $36,625 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
GEI is a catalyst to increase awareness, facilitate engagement, and foster a culture of mutual respect, understanding and fairness where everyone feels valued and empowered through community dialogue and education.
What it reported doing in 2025
Training, Education, and Assessments: GEI offers dynamic training and educational programs through presentations, seminars, community forums, and interactive sessions centered on understanding and dialogue. These experiences increase awareness around inclusion, belonging, and community support. GEIs comprehensive approach contextualizes training within a broader suite of customized services tailored to each organizations unique needs. In addition, GEI provides consultation services by facilitating focus groups, conducting data analysis, and delivering assessments with actionable recommendations that align with an organizations inclusion-related vision, mission, goals, and objectives.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- 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.
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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 85
- Transparency & Controls: 65
- Accountability: 74
- Sustainability: 13
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 81.7%; rating input score 82
- Fundraising efficiency: $3.8 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -41.5%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.57; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.67; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 18.3%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 1.4% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 81.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $163K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $37K · 18 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2012 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- 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.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 16/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 6/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.