Phi Community Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
510367729
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
6673131351
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Private Independent Foundations

Reported finances

Revenue
$523,869
Expenses
$486,773
Assets
$180,282
Liabilities
$15,000

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARCUS BEAL (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • MARCUS BEAL (PRESIDENT)
  • LAMONT AKINS (VICE CHAIR)
  • JERI SHELTON (SECRETARY)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The purpose of the corporation is to promote charitable activities that address community issues of health, youth development, educational support, and low income advocacy within the meaning of section 501(c)(3) of the irc, as amended, including more specifically but not by way of limitations: (a) to promote healthy lifestyles and deliver health education among those least able to afford health care services, (b) to support the development of youth through leadership, career exposure, and job development programs, (c) to advance intellectual achievements of students studying at institutions of higher learning through scholarships and other educational means, (d) to ensure that families who meet federal poverty standards have access to resources that help them pay for and manage their energy bills.

What it reported doing in 2025

This organization was able to provide numerous donations to various non-profit community organizations within dc, md, de and nj; to promote community issues of health, education, advocacy, etc.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86.6%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 93.2%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 91.2%; rating input score 91; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 7.1%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.37; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.1% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.9% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -6.4% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 86.6% of revenue deployed · 93.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $454K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 19 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 8 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 50/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 37/100.