Rend Lake College Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 371078407
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- INA, IL, USA
- Phone
- 6184375321
- Rating
- 77
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Community or Junior Colleges
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,195,688
- Expenses
- $557,552
- Assets
- $10,499,118
- Liabilities
- $32,579
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
14 people listed
People named in this filing
- TONY WIELT (CHAIR)
- MARY ELLEN AIKEN (VICE-CHAIR)
- STEVEN TATE (TREASURER)
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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Rend lake college foundation (rlc foundation) exists for the purpose of stimulating major voluntary private support from alumni, retirees, friends, corporations, foundations, and others to the benefit of rend lake college (rlc). Rlc foundation strives to use current assets and acquire additional assets for identified areas of need as outlined by the college and to act in a fiduciary capacity in administering these assets for the good of rlc, its students, and the community it serves. Rlc foundation will raise funds in order to undertake the following activities: house and administer the rlc student scholarship program, build endowments, assist with rlc capital development projects, support rlc educational programs, and provide recognition opportunities.
What it reported doing in 2024
The game plan capital campaign to revitalize the rlc gym, athletic offices, restrooms, concession stand area, locker rooms, foyer, physical/sports therapy room: rlc foundation's capital campaign the game plan raised funds for the revitalization to the jim waugh gymnasium. Donations were solitited and made to help revitalize a more modern gym facilities that had not been touched for over 50 years. The revitalization addressed many things, such as more space that was needed, handicap bathrooms and as a recuiting tool for rlc to be able to recruit academicly strong athletes. This capital campaign is spread over 3 years.
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 93% of its reported program spending out as grants.
- 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 56
- Transparency & Controls: 94
- Accountability: 94
- Sustainability: 90
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 52.3%; rating input score 52
- Program expense ratio: 70%; rating input score 70
- Fundraising efficiency: $9.2 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 86
- 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: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 53.4%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 18.83; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -5.2% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 52.3% of revenue deployed · 70% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 6 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $390K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 14 people listed
- Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- Related organizations: 2 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 52/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 35/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.