Palo Alto Library Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
752990302
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014
Location
Palo Alto, CA, USA
Phone
6503292516
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$21,681
Expenses
$472,296
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BERN BEECHAM (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • SUSIE THOM (PRESIDENT & CAMPAIGN CO-CH)

People named in this filing

  • BERN BEECHAM (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • HELENE WHEELER (DIRECTOR)
  • ALISON CORMACK (CAMPAIGN CO-CHAIR)

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 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To spearhead fundraising campaigns to support a modern, dynamic library system that meets the needs of everyone in palo alto.

What it reported doing in 2014

Fundraising for city library system. See schedule i.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 81% 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 9
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 89.6%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0.23 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: -2,078.4%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

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

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 89.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $423K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 10/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.