Ortus Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
883313403
IRS 990-PF coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990-PF 2024
Location
Oak Park, IL, USA
Phone
8472877832
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Private Grantmaking Foundations

Reported finances

Revenue
$702,041
Expenses
$1,420,634

Source: IRS Form 990-PF. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Overview

Mission

Private Grantmaking Foundations

What it reported funding in 2024

The foundation reported 13 grants totaling $720,800. The stated grant purposes included to further the mission of the donee organization and fund the ethics of psychedelic research program, to further the mission of the donee organization and for the pritzker dept of psychiatry and behavioral health, and to further the mission of the donee organization and fund the healy student hub, 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
Hybrid. The foundation combined direct charitable work with grants to other organizations or people.
  • Includes asset-sale income: Asset-sale income is shown separately from recurring resources when classifying the revenue model.

The verdict

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

Rating breakdown

  • Grant Deployment: 100
  • Cost Efficiency: 51
  • Transparency: 100
  • Compliance: 100
  • Endowment Health: 54

Detailed rating inputs

Grant Deployment

  • Grant deployment ratio: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings

Cost Efficiency

  • Grant expense ratio: 50.7%; rating input score 51; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency

  • Grant recipient disclosure: Yes; rating input score 100

Compliance

  • Part VII-B activity disclosures: 19 of 19 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: Pass
    • 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: 19.16; rating input score 54; 54th 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: 54th percentile for endowment coverage
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 15 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 — Cost Efficiency: Grant expense ratio scored 51/100.
  • Review — Endowment Health: Endowment-health comparison scored 54/100.