Mr and Mrs Robert H Clark Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
201999313
IRS 990-PF coverage
2009–2022
Forms available
Form 990-PF 2022
Location
Torrance, CA, USA
Phone
3105405990
Rating
92
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Private Independent Foundations

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,350
Expenses
$120,190

Source: IRS Form 990-PF. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Overview

Mission

Private Independent Foundations

What it reported funding in 2022

The foundation reported 4 grants totaling $117,040. The stated grant purposes included to support children who have significant needs currently unmet through exisiting programs or government agencies., to support people whose christian love and commitment enables and empowers them to reach out to other real people in need, and to provide mentors, volunteers, therapeutic and educational programs necessary for the children to heal from the trauma, neglect and abuse they have experienced., plus 1 other reported purpose.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the foundation's positive operating resources came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The foundation distributed 99% of its reported charitable disbursements as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes to charitable grants and the filed numbers largely add up. Assets provide a limited cushion relative to annual grants.

Rating breakdown

  • Grant Deployment: 100
  • Cost Efficiency: 97
  • Transparency: 100
  • Compliance: 100
  • Endowment Health: 28

Detailed rating inputs

Grant Deployment

  • Grant deployment ratio: 100%; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Cost Efficiency

  • Grant expense ratio: 97.4%; rating input score 97; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency

  • Grant recipient disclosure: Yes; rating input score 100

Compliance

  • Part VII-B activity disclosures: 18 of 18 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Property sale or exchange with a disqualified person: Pass
    • Borrowing from or lending to a disqualified person: Pass
    • Goods, services, or facilities involving a disqualified person: Pass
    • Compensation paid to a disqualified person: Pass
    • Assets transferred to a disqualified person: Pass
    • Payment to a government official: Pass
    • Uncorrected prior self-dealing: Pass
    • Prior-year undistributed income: NotApplicable
    • Excess business holdings: Pass
    • Investments that may jeopardize charitable purposes: Pass
    • Uncorrected prior-year jeopardizing investments: Pass
    • Attempt to influence legislation: Pass
    • Attempt to influence an election: Pass
    • Grants to individuals: Pass
    • Grants to organizations: Pass
    • Spending for a noncharitable purpose: Pass
    • Funds received for a personal-benefit contract: Pass
    • Premiums paid on a personal-benefit contract: Pass
    • Prohibited tax-shelter transaction: Pass
  • Filing consistency checks: 9; rating input score 100

Endowment Health

  • Endowment-health comparison: 11.79; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Grants: 100% of grant recipient detail disclosed
  • Payout: At least 100% grant deployment rate
  • Trustees: Filed trustees detail
  • Self-dealing: 100% of reviewed questions answered “No”
  • Investments: 28th percentile for endowment coverage
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2009 to 2022
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.

  • High — Endowment Health: Endowment-health comparison scored 28/100.