GITM Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
272422791
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2015–2016
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2016, Form 990-N 2010
Location
East Peoria, IL, USA
Phone
3092568697
Rating
95
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Corporate Foundations

Reported finances

Revenue
$143,752
Expenses
$160,378
Assets
$90,276
Liabilities
$22,134

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SHAUN NEWELL (President)
  • PATRICK WARD (Vice President)
  • DENISE URYCKI (Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • SHAUN NEWELL (President)
  • PATRICK WARD (Vice President)
  • DAN BENDER (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Conduct research, education, and outreach activities that are aimed toward promoting and enhancing the well-being of children, families, individuals, and communities

What it reported doing in 2016

Nutrition education

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 78% 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.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 97
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 24
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 90.9%; rating input score 91

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -11.6%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.56; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.25; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.7%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16.2% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.1% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 90.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 4 filed program accomplishments · $146K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2015 to 2016
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 12/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 44/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.