Southfield Community Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
382918048
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2013
Forms available
Form 990 2013
Location
Detroit, MI, USA
Phone
3139616675
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Foundations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$627,008
Expenses
$203,052
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RAQUEL ROBINSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • RAQUEL ROBINSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $70,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To enhance the quality of life for those who work or live in the lathrup village and southfield communities.

What it reported doing in 2013

Community services - involvement in and with various community organizations to develop collaborative activities among charities and other community organizations

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 60% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 49% for direct work, and 51% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 48
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 46
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 61.7%; rating input score 62
  • Program expense ratio: 33.7%; rating input score 34
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.94 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 69.4%; rating input score 69; 26th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 67.6%; rating input score 97; 97th 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: 34.5%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 49.9% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -70.7% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 61.7% of revenue deployed · 33.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 20 of 20 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $69K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $70K · 21 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 26 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2011 to 2013
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 34/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 20/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.