In Search of Genius

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
208058540
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014
Location
Flossmoor, IL, USA
Phone
7087210420
Rating
53
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$226,807
Expenses
$264,214
Assets
$49,045
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • GERALD WALANKA (FOUNDER): $62,500 total reported compensation
  • ERNESTINE KEY (EXECUTIVE DI): $50,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To support the science education of elementary school children living in under served areas of chicago by developing and providing both in school and after school science programs and mentoring led by college students.

What it reported doing in 2014

The foundation served third, fourth, and fifth grade students at under served elemntary schools in the greater chicago area with weekly science and mentoring programs that combine hands-on science projects with an overlay of mentoring and role modeling by local university science students. At school year end, an inter-school science competition is held between the schools.

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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. 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: 47
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 63
  • Sustainability: 21
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 53.8%; rating input score 54
  • Program expense ratio: 46.2%; rating input score 46
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.4 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -16.5%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.19; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 42.6%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -23.9% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -30.8% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -55.2% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 53.8% of revenue deployed · 46.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $122K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $62K · 14 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2013 to 2014
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

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

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 54/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 46/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 11/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 11/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.