Tessa Sutton Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
922286583
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2023–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Dunlap, IL, USA
Phone
3092653786
Rating
46
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$84,155
Expenses
$96,916
Assets
$65,392
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Caleb Aeschliman (President)
  • Michelle Sutton (Vice President & Secretary)

People named in this filing

  • Caleb Aeschliman (President)
  • Michelle Sutton (Vice President & Secretary)
  • Richard Sutton (Treasurer)

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

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

Overview

Mission

The Tessa Sutton Foundation provides support to Illinois families and individuals battling cancer or catastrophic illness.

What it reported doing in 2025

The Tessa Sutton Foundation provides support to families and individuals battling cancer or catastrophic illness. A nomination process is maintained with full board of directors approval required for any support provided in adherence with our Conflict of Interest Policy. $60,500 was provided to 37 different families through this process during 2023 with no one family receiving more than $2000.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 19
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 19.5%; rating input score 20
  • Program expense ratio: 16.9%; rating input score 17

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -15.2%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.67; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13.9% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -30.5% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -8.3% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 19.5% of revenue deployed · 16.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $16K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 20/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 17/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 25/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.