Stark Community Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
340943665
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Canton, OH, USA
Phone
330-454-3426
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Foundations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$38,502,904
Expenses
$22,042,441
Assets
$406,010,620
Liabilities
$114,064,370

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARK J SAMOLCZYK (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARK J SAMOLCZYK (PRESIDENT): $317,284 total reported compensation
  • BRIDGETTE L NEISEL (V.P. OF ADVANCEMENT): $215,579 total reported compensation
  • CARRIE L BAST (V.P. OF FINANCE & CFO): $188,877 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Partnering with individuals, families, businesses and nonprofits to help them achieve their charitable goals.

What it reported doing in 2024

Stark community foundation and our growing family of donors support a wide array of local projects and organizations each year, awarding over $16.5 million in grants for 2024. Generous individuals, families, businesses and organizations supported programs and services that strengthen our community in areas including education, arts, culture, economic development, health and hunger.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 69% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 95% 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. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 83
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75.8%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 79.4%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: $33.43 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 95%; rating input score 95; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 93.1%; rating input score 93; 22nd 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 42.8%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 18.42; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.28; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.2%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.9% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 75.8% of revenue deployed · 79.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $17.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $317K · 19 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 41 of 42 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 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 268 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 266 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 49/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.