Presidential Precinct
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 461084540
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Charlottesville, VA, USA
- Phone
- 4342008822
- Rating
- 62
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Promotion of International Understanding
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,489,368
- Expenses
- $1,213,789
- Assets
- $663,061
- Liabilities
- $80,347
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
15 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- TOYOSI OGUNSEYE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- TOYOSI OGUNSEYE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $220,945 total reported compensation
- TRACY DELGADO (DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR): $106,296 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
We engage and inspire emerging leaders to address the most pressing challenges in their countries.
What it reported doing in 2024
The precinct empowers the next generation of global leaders through a collaboration with some of the brightest minds and most historic resources in the united states. The precinct is a unique partnership that includes the university of Virginia, the college of william and mary, monticello, montpelier, and highland. By combining the academic resources of the universities with the rich history of the presidential homes, the precinct is able to lead programs that encourage young leaders to exchange ideas, seek expert advice, learn from world history, and solve the most pressing challenges in their communities.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 83% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 52
- Transparency & Controls: 65
- Accountability: 74
- Sustainability: 48
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 50.9%; rating input score 51
- Program expense ratio: 62.6%; rating input score 63
- Fundraising efficiency: $7.3 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 18.5%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.55; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 27%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 50.9% of revenue deployed · 62.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $760K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $221K · 15 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2014 to 2024
- 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 51/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 28/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 40/100.