Rsm Us Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
472248988
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2014
Location
Davenport, IA, USA
Phone
3193541500
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,047,036
Expenses
$7,007,407
Assets
$17,497,106
Liabilities
$1,419,596

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TONY WOOD (FORMER VICE PRESIDENT)
  • BRIAN BECKER (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • DOUG OPHEIM (CHAIR & TREASURER)
  • ROBBIE BEYER (DIRECTOR)
  • CHUCK FREEMAN (DIRECTOR)

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

We are dedicated to building tomorrow's middle market leaders by:- enhancing educational outcomes through programs for individuals to have a career path to become an entrepreneur or middle market business leader and/or- supporting organizations committed to providing a more stable environment for youth in the areas of hunger, housing or health, which will help them excel in education

What it reported doing in 2024

Power of love (fka birdies fore love): in 2024, rsm us foundation teamed with the davis love foundation for the twelth annual power of love campaign. Originated by the davis love foundation, the campaign has generated financial support for many charities helping children and families in the southeast. With rsm us foundation's support, power of love has expanded its reach to include charities focused on children and families across the united states, canada, india, and el salvador. In 2024, more than $3.4 million was raised to benefit over 100 charities. In addition to financial support, more than 13,000 rsm employees and their family members spent 63,000 hours volunteering across the united states, canada, india, and el salvador.

Operating model

Revenue model
Affiliate-supported. 63% of the money available for current operations came from contributions from related organizations.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 98% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 42
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 98.7%; rating input score 99
  • Program expense ratio: 99.2%; rating input score 99
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 76.2%; rating input score 76; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.6%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.5; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 98.7% of revenue deployed · 99.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 7 filed program accomplishments · $6.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 25 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 165 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 165 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 36/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.