GREGORY BAE MEMORIAL FUND Aka Groundhog Projects

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
872089955
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2023–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
4342296352
Rating
52
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Arts, Cultural Organizations - Multipurpose

Reported finances

Revenue
$20,533
Expenses
$7,011
Assets
$64,013
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Bosco Bae (Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • Bosco Bae (Executive Director)
  • Charles Anthony Lewis (Registered Agent & Director)
  • Josh Dihle (Director)

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

Overview

Mission

The Gregory Bae Memorial Fund (aka Groundhog Projects) was created in the memory of Gregory Bae and will engage in Charitable, Benevolent, Educational, Civic, and Social purposes related to the practice of artist Gregory Bae. The Fund will be utilized to advance the vision of Gregory Bae in using Art to advance issues of justice. This includes, but not limited to, funding projects, exhibitions, and/or making contributions to charities engaging in benevolent, educational, civic, and social actions/programs to achieve these ends as well as promoting the artwork and artistry of Gregory Bae.

What it reported doing in 2025

During the 2025 fiscal year, the organization completed driving the seedcorn phase of the project: Tiger Balm. The organization also executed one group exhibition and further prepared, installed, and developed programming for a two-person exhibition.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 66% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. 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: 19
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 85
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 10.8%; rating input score 11
  • Program expense ratio: 31.6%; rating input score 32

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 65.9%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 9.13; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 40% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 60.9% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16.3% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 10.8% of revenue deployed · 31.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 11/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 32/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.