Manatee Community Foundation Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 650833500
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Bradenton, FL, USA
- Phone
- 9417477765
- Rating
- 79
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Community Foundations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $10,235,365
- Expenses
- $7,088,291
- Assets
- $69,118,344
- Liabilities
- $18,098,375
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
18 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- VERONICA THAMES (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
Highest reported compensation
- ERIN JONES (CFO): $268,640 total reported compensation
- VERONICA THAMES (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $194,581 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Manatee community foundation partners with our citizens to strengthen and enhance our community through philanthropy, education, and service-now and forever.
What it reported doing in 2024
Grants: manatee community foundation awarded 328 grants totaling $4,872,812 to 130 nonprofit organizations based on philanthropic aspirations of donors that entrust the foundation with their charitable giving. These grants were awarded to organizations with missions focused on the arts, education, health, human services, civic engagement, youth development, animal welfare and the environment for operations, capital needs, and programs/services. Scholarships: manatee community foundation awarded 14 scholarships totaling $21,362 from scholarship funds to new and returning college students, including graduating high school students attending a community college or 4-year university, students attending graduate school, and learners returning to school to pursue a vocational or technical certification.nonprofit education and community engagement: over the last fiscal year, manatee community foundation facilitated community conversations and forums to learn from the lived experiences of participants and to share knowledge about pressing issues; facilitated trainings to support nonprofit growth and sustainability; and connected residents and donors to causes they wish to invest in. Examples of this work include advancing engagement in grade-level reading success, connecting partners in child welfare systems, and helping organizations distribute emergency rental assistance.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 69% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 87% of its reported program spending out as grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 72
- Transparency & Controls: 75
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 82
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 76.7%; rating input score 77
- Program expense ratio: 79.1%; rating input score 79
- Fundraising efficiency: $7.49 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 92.5%; rating input score 92; 22nd 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; 66th 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: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 30.7%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 9.75; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.26; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 3.2%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 10% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5.3% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 7.7% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 76.7% of revenue deployed · 79.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5.6M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $269K · 18 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 35 of 36 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 132 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 135 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 30/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 51/100.