Metro Trans Umbrella Group

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
471427310
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2019, Form 990-N 2016
Location
Saint Louis, MO, USA
Phone
3143491402
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Civil Rights, Social Action, Advocacy N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$621,766
Expenses
$449,635
Assets
$443,701
Liabilities
$1,289

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • June Choate (Executive Director)
  • Nokie Rae (Board President)
  • Ray Pillar (Vice President)
  • Cole Costello (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • June Choate (Executive Director): $68,453 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 bring together the community of trans, non-binary, genderqueer, androgynous, intersex & our allies in the St. Louis metro area through community, visibility, advocacy, and education.

What it reported doing in 2025

Social and emotional support, resources, and referrals for trans and gender-expansive adult community members in need. Community Outreach drop-in hours are held weekly on Tuesdays and Thursdays, with additional appointments available throughout the week. Includes a food and hygiene pantry with monthly delivery service, a free clothing closet, bus passes, peer counseling, community gathering space, and name change clinic support. Serving over 2,800 clients per year. The long-term goal is improved quality of life for community members through increased access to essential items, services, and social and emotional support.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 61
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 61
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 53.7%; rating input score 54
  • Program expense ratio: 74.3%; rating input score 74
  • Fundraising efficiency: $20.18 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • 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: 27.7%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.99; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.2%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.1% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 18.7% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 53.7% of revenue deployed · 74.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $334K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $68K · 6 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • 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 54/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 56/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.