Leadership Foundations

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
251741353
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Tacoma, WA, USA
Phone
2532925991
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,012,599
Expenses
$2,952,012
Assets
$5,964,402
Liabilities
$6,279,232

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

Leadership & pay

35 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LARRY LLOYD (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • LARRY LLOYD (PRESIDENT): $159,498 total reported compensation
  • DAVE HILLIS (CCIC SHOEMAKER SR INNOVATI): $155,968 total reported compensation
  • AMY NEMETH (VP OF ADVANCEMENT): $147,630 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Developing, strengthening & sustaining local leadership foundations for the social and spiritual renewal of their cities.

What it reported doing in 2025

Member services support: deliver membership services for the international network of local leadership foundations by providing relationships, readiness and resources.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 50% for direct work, and 50% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 54
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 81.4%; rating input score 81
  • Program expense ratio: 81.8%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.36 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 14th 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: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 78.2%; rating input score 78; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.02; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.05; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 32.8%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16.7% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 81.4% of revenue deployed · 81.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 24 of 24 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $159K · 35 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 33 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 28 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 18 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 37/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 33/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.