St Petersburg College Foundation Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 591954362
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Saint Petersburg, FL, USA
- Phone
- 7273413285
- Rating
- 78
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Single Organization Support
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $18,386,327
- Expenses
- $7,042,447
- Assets
- $101,681,023
- Liabilities
- $25,437
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
22 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- DR TONJUA WILLIAMS (COLLEGE PRES): $456,762 total reported compensation
- JESSE TURTLE (SECRETARY): $260,736 total reported compensation
- MIKE MEIGS (TREASURER): $168,715 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 foundation is committed to advancing the mission and vision of st. Petersburg college by aligning its efforts with the college's three-year strategic plan: "better jobs, better lives,(continued on schedule o)
What it reported doing in 2024
The foundation has over 287 named scholarship funds that provide financial assistance to st. Petersburg college students. Through the generosity of our donors, we have specific scholarships available for every area of study including (but not limited to), nursing, education, study abroad programs and financial assistance for our returning veterans. Each scholarship has unique awarding criteria which may include financial need and/or academic achievement. College expenses have risen nearly 40% over the last decade, making this the most difficult time in history for young people to pay for a college education, according to the us department of education. Without the help of financial assistance, many of our students would not otherwise have the opportunity to attend college. (continued on schedule o)
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 66% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 85% 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filed totals do not add up.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 68
- Transparency & Controls: 72
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 91
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 65.7%; rating input score 66
- Program expense ratio: 80.5%; rating input score 80
- Fundraising efficiency: $10.89 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 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: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 61.7%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 14.44; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 4.1%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 9.4% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 11.2% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 5.2% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 65.7% of revenue deployed · 80.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $5.7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $457K · 22 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $533K reported
- Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 3 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 41/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 59/100.