John T Petters Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 200881450
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2013
- Forms available
- Form 990 2013
- Location
- Roseville, MN, USA
- Rating confidence
- Limited
- Sector
- Educational Services and Schools - Other
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $0
- Expenses
- $610,906
- Assets
- $0
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ROBERT D LAWSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- ROBERT D LAWSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $32,986 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
In honor of john t. Petters, we develop global competence in talented students.see sched 0, line 07 for detailed description.
What it reported doing in 2013
Provided funding for scholarship programs that support deserving students who are attending accredited postsecondary institutions of their choice.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- No positive adjusted resources. The filing reports no positive adjusted operating resources.
- Distribution model
- No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.
The verdict
- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Accountability: 10
- Sustainability: 3
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: Limited
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- 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 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: Limited
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 5.4%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: -6.2% per year; rating input score 0; 46th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -66.8% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 4 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $33K · 5 people listed
- Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2010 to 2013
- 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.