Legacytree Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 731556664
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2013–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-T 2025, Form 990-N 2008
- Location
- Spring Hill, TN, USA
- Phone
- 6154688048
- Rating
- 62
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Christianity
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $8,404,975
- Expenses
- $4,283,228
- Assets
- $78,503,886
- Liabilities
- $59,417,223
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
9 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JAMES WOLTER (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- JAMES WOLTER (PRESIDENT): $260,908 total reported compensation
- NANETTE BEEBE (SECRETARY/TREASURER): $232,732 total reported compensation
- KEVIN KIRKPATRICK (SR. CASE DESIGN SPECIALIST): $193,279 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To provide spiritual, physical and humanitarian aid to those in need.
What it reported doing in 2025
In 2025, legacytree foundation (ltf) presented 143 grants to worthy organizations who provide the hands-on services of fulfulling ltf's mission to provide spiritual, physical, and humanitarian aid to those in need. Grants are distributed to ltf's chosen charitable impact partners in addition to organizations recommended by ltf donors.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 65% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 61% of its reported program spending out as grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most filed governance safeguards are in place. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 50
- Transparency & Controls: 71
- Accountability: 60
- Sustainability: 72
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 49.7%; rating input score 50
- Program expense ratio: 56.9%; rating input score 57
- Fundraising efficiency: $8.11 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd 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: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 40%; rating input score 40; 9th 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: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 49%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 18.33; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.76; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 22.8%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 7.3% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 49.7% of revenue deployed · 56.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 2 of 5 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $261K · 9 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $346K reported
- Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2013 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 69 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 64 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 50/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 40/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 57/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 29/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 9/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.