Stream Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
851991763
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2021
Location
Dallas, TX, USA
Phone
9728500081
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Job Training

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$172,122
Expenses
$284,365
Assets
$40,375
Liabilities
$1,107

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Ellis Thomas (President)

People named in this filing

  • Ellis Thomas (President)
  • Matthew McKamy (Director)
  • P Trip Dyer (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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

STREAM Foundation was formed to educate, train, mentor and provide scholarship and internship opportunities to students from underrepresented groups in the area of asset management with the ultimate goal of increasing industry representations. In order to accomplish its goal, STREAM Foundation utilizes a two pronged approach. First, STREAM Foundation provides education, training and networking opportunities for students from underrepresented groups. STREAM Foundation alsos assist students in obtaining internships and/or other work experience with asset management firms in order to allow students to learn more about the industry, gain valuable experience and deepen and expand their professional networks. Second, STREAM Foundation aims to create change in the asset management industry's recruiting, hiring and retention practices with respect to underrepresented candidates and employees. Finally, STREAM Foundation provides college students with financial support during its internships.

What it reported doing in 2024

In 2023 we provided 33 internships to students from underserved communities. These internships were completed by college students from around the country with several leading asset management firms in Austin, Cincinnati, Dallas, Charlotte, Houston, and Fort Worth. Each of our interns was provided at a minimum $10,000 in total compensation via salary from the asset managers and/or scholarship assistance provided by our organization. During 2024, our organization granted $117,663.10 to our 33 interns. During the internships, we host educational events with senior members of the investment community to 1 expand the students' network, 2 provide insights into asset management roles across all segments of the industry and/or 3 discuss experiences senior members working in asset management that are part of these underserved communities have faced and the challenges they have had to navigate. Another service that we be provide under the program is each student will be assigned a mentor from a different asset management firm to further expand his/her network and provide helpful insights and guidance. Our intern alumni have gone on to complete subsequent internships or enter the workforce full-time at reputable organizations such as Aksia, Bank of America, Canyon Partners, Citigroup, Crestline, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan and Teacher Retirement System of Texas, to name a few. We have assisted in placing them in these roles and will continue to be supportive as each enters the workforce. We have brought awareness to the industry through educational presentations at several colleges, universities, and student organizations since our founding. These presentations were to move forward our cause of educating students from underserved communities about asset management and what our organization was doing to increase the number of roles for people from these communities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 77% 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. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 17
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 95%; rating input score 95
  • Program expense ratio: 57.5%; rating input score 57
  • 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: 99.6%; rating input score 100; 60th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -65.2%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.14; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.4% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.2% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -15% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 95% of revenue deployed · 57.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $163K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 45 of 45 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 57/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 8/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 37/100.