Irvin C Chapman Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
953801337
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Orange, CA, USA
Phone
7146282854
Rating
55
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$5
Expenses
$180,151
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • HAROLD W HEWITT JR (TRUSTEE): $651,318 total reported compensation
  • BEHZAD BINESH (TRUSTEE): $292,745 total reported compensation
  • JOHN CEBULA (TRUSTEE): $170,013 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The foundation's exempt purpose is to support chapman university's chapel program and the ernie chapman stadium. In addition to supporting a number of other publically supported charitable organizations.

What it reported doing in 2016

The foundation is an irc section 509(a)(3) supporting organization. As a supporting organization, the foundation operates exclusively for the benefit of, to perform the function of, and to carry out the exempt purposes of the organizations listed in schedule a.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - 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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 10
  • Sustainability: 1
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 60.8%; rating input score 61
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -3,602,920%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 63%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 40.3% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -99.5% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -48.9% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 60.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $110K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $651K · 3 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 15 of 15 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2012 to 2016
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 5 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.