Grove Collective Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
874015431
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2022519574
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Management & Technical Assistance

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,145,679
Expenses
$951,503
Assets
$817,651
Liabilities
$199,440

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • JACOB SCHRAMM (MANAGING PARTNER): $212,825 total reported compensation
  • NICOLE BAKER FULGHAM (DIRECTOR): $24,678 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To increase economic and social mobility by equipping innovators with teams of experienced social entrepreneurs who can help them accelerate their sector-changing ideas. Solutions for the world's most pressing social challenges are often envisioned by leaders of the nonprofits and universities facing those challenges every day. Unfortunately, those leaders are often too busy running their organizations to move the big idea, so it never leaves the drawing board. The foundation is a social-impact organization that provides entrepreneurial capacity to help partners move their big idea from concept to concrete.

What it reported doing in 2024

The redemptive leadership project seeks to create a space for people with meaningful differences to come together in true fellowship, during a time when fewer and fewer such spaces exist. The collective curated an invitation list to bring together a community with diverse expressions of embodied faith and experience, representing different cultures, denominations, political views, sexual orientations, roles in education, and understandings of god. The collective deeply believes in the power of building community across many lines of difference, and looks forward to co-creating a sacred and brave space of listening, learning, and community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 85% 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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 56
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 91%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: $60.94 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 33.3%; rating input score 33; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 16.9%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.86; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.24; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 25%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16.6% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.1% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 76% of revenue deployed · 91% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 6 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $866K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $213K · 6 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $292K reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2021 to 2024
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 33/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 28/100.