Roundup Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237425833
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Denver, CO, USA
Phone
3037578008
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Private Independent Foundations

Reported finances

Revenue
$551,789
Expenses
$109,593
Assets
$1,597,580
Liabilities
$991,806

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CAROL OSBORN (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • WOLF THOMPSON (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ED SCHANS (PRESIDENT)
  • STACY GULMANTOVICZ (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • STACY GULMANTOVICZ (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $75,504 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Roundup Foundation Inc. is both organized and operated exclusively for the benefit of, to perform the functions of and carry out the purposes of Roundup Fellowship, Inc, a Colorado Not-For-Profit corporation. In this capacity the organization owns certain property and leases such property to Roundup Fellowship.

What it reported doing in 2016

Roundup Foundation , Inc is controlled and operated by Roundup Fellowship, Inc. 501c3, pursuant to IRS Rules Regulations pertaining to supporting organizations. Roundup Foundation Inc. is both organized and operated exclusively for the benefit of, to perform the functions of and carry out the purposes of Roundup Fellowship, Inc, a Colorado Not-For-Profit corporation.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 76
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 43.7%; rating input score 44
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • 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: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 80.1%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 14.58; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.62; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: Limited

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -10.7% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.3% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -3.5% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 43.7% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $110K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $76K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 16 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2010 to 2016
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 44/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 16/100.