St Louis Community Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
431758789
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
St Louis, MO, USA
Phone
3145888200
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Community Foundations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$146,274,809
Expenses
$79,591,262
Assets
$494,386,062
Liabilities
$17,330,659

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

Leadership & pay

31 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KELVIN ADAMS (PRESIDENT & CEO)
  • ANDREA A JACKSON-JENNINGS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • KELVIN ADAMS (PRESIDENT & CEO): $438,780 total reported compensation
  • DWIGHT D CANNING (VP & CFO): $245,923 total reported compensation
  • ELIZABETH M GEORGE (DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY INVESTMENT): $194,434 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To improve the quality of life in the greater st louis metropolitan area by connecting individuals, families, and businesses to their philanthropic goals.

What it reported doing in 2024

For the 12 months ended 12/31/24, we serviced 689 funds to various not-for-profit organizations ranging from $3 to $4,000,000. We assisted individuals and businesses in making charitable contributions in this and other communities by administering charitable funds established by them.we do this by: maximizing financial and tax advantaged giving, making giving simple and efficient, honoring donor intent, connecting donors with their causes and each other, and strategizing ways to make an impact, taking leadership in community issues to promote collaboration and responsibly stewarding charitable assets.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 89% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 89% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 92
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 68%; rating input score 68
  • Program expense ratio: 99.7%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: $61,343.05 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 28th 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: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • 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: Pass
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 96.6%; rating input score 97; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th 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: 45.6%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.21; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.1%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.8% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.5% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 68% of revenue deployed · 99.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 19 of 19 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $79.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $439K · 31 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.2M reported
  • Consistency: 39 of 40 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 839 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 842 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.