Project Legacy

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
811223253
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2017
Location
Rochester, MN, USA
Phone
5072543387
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Family Counseling

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$492,706
Expenses
$474,327
Assets
$80,798
Liabilities
$16,273

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DON BALDUS (PRESIDENT)
  • CAROLE PASTERNAK JD (VICE-PRESIDENT)
  • KAREN EDMONDS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • KAREN EDMONDS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $76,563 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Project legacy provides hope, connections and support to youth and young adults of color who may have experienced poverty, trauma, and homelessness, or are refugees from war-torn countries and who have not had a positive support system, allowing them to transform their lives and become involved members of our community.

What it reported doing in 2024

Legacy scholars is an innovative program designed to help retain first-generation students and young adults of color through graduation, helping provide support, assistance and skills to contribute to their educational success. Through supporting 85 young people in 2024 through tuition and education assistance, rent assistance, food, mental health services, basic needs, recovery support and case management, project legacy continues our mission of providing hope and opportunities to young people willing to make the necessary changes in their lives.programming for participants of the legacy scholars program includes: tuition and rent assistance educational assistance and tutoring mental health support meals and groceries educational supplies mentorship college visits career planning2024 legacy scholars outcomes include:6 college degrees, one high school diploma and a technical degree were earned by bipoc, first-generation students.$38,000 was invested in housing assistance for youth struggling to remain in college. $1,000 was provided for medical and dental expenses$10,600 was invested in the cost of groceries and nourishment$6,500 was invested in helping youth with clothing costs$8,000 supported telecommunications costs$54,207 was invested in tuition assistance $5,700 was provided in childcare assistance costs$3,000 was provided for college visits$10,000 was provided for school suppliesyoung people ages 16-24 who have grown up in generational poverty and faced multiple barriers are eligible for this program.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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.

The verdict

STRONG - 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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 81.3%; rating input score 81
  • Program expense ratio: 84.5%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $85.69 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 3.7%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.17; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.2; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.1%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -5.9% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 81.3% of revenue deployed · 84.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $401K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $77K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 10/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 48/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.