Linnea Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
861373378
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2021
Forms available
Form 990 2021
Location
Missoula, MT, USA
Phone
4063704052
Rating
52
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Philanthropy, Charity, Voluntarism Promotion

Reported finances

Revenue
$18,426
Expenses
$10,522
Assets
$7,904
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN MILLS (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • JOHN MILLS (PRESIDENT)
  • LISA MILLS (TREASURER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To support social & environmental causes, particularly those causes that support at-risk youth and individuals.

What it reported doing in 2021

Made donations to other organizations and one individual to assist with medical expenses.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and a relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 54.3%; rating input score 54
  • Program expense ratio: 95%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 9th 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: Limited
  • Governance controls: 0 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 42.9%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.75; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 54.3% of revenue deployed · 95% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $10K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 12 of 13 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 54/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.