Steele Memorial Library Foundation of Ch

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
204221598
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Elmira, NY, USA
Phone
6077339173
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$425,904
Expenses
$245,281
Assets
$4,560,840
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANTHONY J PUCCI (PRESIDENT)
  • RITA MCCABE (VICE-PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • ANTHONY J PUCCI (PRESIDENT)
  • RITA MCCABE (VICE-PRESIDENT)
  • BARBARA LAWRENCE (SECRETARY)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The steele foundation of chemung county is a non-profit organization whose sole purpose is to provide financial support to the chemung county library district. The steele memorial library and its branches are an integral part of our community. A vibrant library enhances our quality of life in many ways. It is a source of information, cultural enrichment, entertainment, and relaxation for all residents. As support from tax dollars decreases, our endowment funds ensure that the library will be able to adapt to the increasing and ever-changing needs of our community. Through the rigorous exercise of our fiduciary obligations the foundation uses its resources in the most efficient, effective, and responsible manner. While our commitment to the library of today is central to our vision, so is our desire to fulfill the promise of tomorrow.

What it reported doing in 2025

To support the chemung county library district and related entities and maintain library operations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 86
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 78%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 42.4%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 18.59; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 78% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $191K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 14 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.