Robert and Eleanor Franke Charitable Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
450998178
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017
Location
La Crosse, WI, USA
Phone
6087823223
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Foundations
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,766,504
Expenses
$22,746,063
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • PETER GRABOW (DIRECTOR): $117,022 total reported compensation
  • MELVYN HOFFMAN (EXEC. DIR./P): $51,960 total reported compensation
  • CYNTHIA HOFFMAN (EXEC. ASST/S): $43,068 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

See schedule o

What it reported doing in 2017

The foundation is organized and shall at all times be operated exclusively for the benefit of, to perform the functions of and to carry out the purposes of the supported organizations, namely, the la crosse community foundation, inc., the diocese of la crosse and mayo clinic health system in la crosse, formerly franciscan skemp healthcare, and the wishes of the frankes as expressed in mr. Franke's last will and testament, and its activities shall be limited to such charitable purposes as will benefit, carry out the purposes of or perform the functions of the supported organizations, including, but not limited to: the making of grants and other distributions to any of the supported organizations or for the benefit of or to support the charitable purposes of any of the supported organizations; the management, investment and administration of funds for the benefit of or to support the charitable purposes of any of the supported organizations; and the performance of functions and the incurrence of expenses incidental to the management, administration and operation of the corporation.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 63
  • Sustainability: 10
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 99%; rating input score 99
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 60%; rating input score 60; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -722.2%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.6%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 79.2% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.2% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -17.6% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 99% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 5 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $22.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $117K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2012 to 2017
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 6 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.