Seattle Colleges Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
830551671
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2017
Location
Seattle, WA, USA
Phone
2069343057
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,475,653
Expenses
$8,366,217
Assets
$51,307,609
Liabilities
$3,893,480

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

Leadership & pay

24 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KERRY HOWELL (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
  • TRACI RUSSELL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • KERRY HOWELL (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $241,922 total reported compensation
  • TRACI RUSSELL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $175,945 total reported compensation
  • NICK PENNINGTON (ED OF FINANCE AND ADMIN): $164,117 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 seattle colleges foundation catalyzes community support to advance the mission, work and impact of seattle colleges. We engage our community to transform lives, promote equity and increase access to quality, affordable education.

What it reported doing in 2024

Student scholarships: seattle colleges is an inclusive, open-access institution, and we recognize that significant gaps in educational attainment persist for first-generation students, students of color, and students facing economic challenges. Scholarships remove financial barriers to college enrollment, reduce student debt, and correlate with certificate/degree completion, career attainment, and a highly qualified work force. We granted 560 scholarships during the fiscal year.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 71% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 41% for direct work, and 59% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 89%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.97 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -52.8%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.13; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.6%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 30.1% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.5% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.2% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 89% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 19 of 19 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $7.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $242K · 24 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 26/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.