Rotary Club of San Jose Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
946112270
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
San Jose, CA, USA
Phone
4082976100
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$990,272
Expenses
$1,095,280
Assets
$8,308,227
Liabilities
$6,410

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • AUDREY FOX (PRESIDENT)
  • GINGER SOTELO (VICE PRESIDENT, FINANCE)
  • SCOTT PAINE (VICE PRESIDENT, GRANTS)

Highest reported compensation

  • LESLEE HAMILTON (SECRETARY, EXECUTIVE DIREC): $151,042 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The primary purpose of the foundation is to participate in community service and philanthropy. The foundation makes grants to aid youth and to assist in community and international service. The priority of the funding is to support local and community organizations. The foundation also sponsors projects and identifiable capital purchases. Generally, grants are given for operating expenses, office and administrative expenses, the purchase of real estate, contributions to a "general fund or "campaign", or to an individual.

What it reported doing in 2024

Grants & projects: the foundation makes small capital grants to assist local community nonprofits, disaster relief efforts, and international service organizations. The majority of funding supports local community organizations. For example, several organizations received grants for computers, which facilitated the covid-induced need to work from home. Our members were involved in projects in vietnam, el salvador, tanzania, and other countries. The foundation also sponsors projects and identifiable capital purchases.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 70% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 50% for direct work, and 50% for 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: 97
  • Transparency & Controls: 62
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 93.4%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: $540.37 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 82.9%; rating input score 83; 35th 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: 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: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -10.6%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.59; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.5%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -11.6% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -6.8% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 93.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $151K · 15 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 16 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 17 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: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 59/100.