Payson Family Foundation C/o Incorp Services Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
860842222
IRS 990-PF coverage
2010–2018
Forms available
Form 990-PF 2018
Location
Phoenix, AZ, USA
Phone
5204713695
Rating
54
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Private Grantmaking Foundations

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,835
Expenses
$9,340

Source: IRS Form 990-PF. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Overview

Mission

Private Grantmaking Foundations

What it reported funding in 2018

The foundation reported 21 filed grant rows totaling $2,500. The stated grant purposes included donation made to assist organization in its mission to maintain and defend the principles of civil and religious liberty as set forth in the mayflower compact., to the general fund of the museum in support of its mission to inspire people to live in harmony with the natural world., and to the general fund of an international medical humanitarian organization that provides aid in nearly 60 countries., plus 18 other reported purposes.

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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and the filing identifies who received its grants. A relatively small share of spending goes to grants.

Rating breakdown

  • Grant Deployment: NotEnoughData
  • Cost Efficiency: 27
  • Transparency: 100
  • Compliance: 100
  • Endowment Health: 91

Detailed rating inputs

Grant Deployment

  • Grant deployment ratio: Limited

Cost Efficiency

  • Grant expense ratio: 26.8%; rating input score 27; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency

  • Grant recipient disclosure: Yes; rating input score 100

Compliance

  • Foundation 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
    • Individual grants for travel, study or similar purposes: Pass
    • Grants outside qualifying charitable organization categories: 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: 8; rating input score 100

Endowment Health

  • Endowment-health comparison: 24.13; rating input score 91; 91st 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
  • Trustees: Filed trustees detail
  • Self-dealing: 100% of reviewed questions answered “No”
  • Investments: 91th percentile for endowment coverage
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2010 to 2018
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 21 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 — Cost Efficiency: Grant expense ratio scored 27/100.