The Bungie Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
272313989
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-PF 2022
Location
Bellevue, WA, USA
Phone
4254406862
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Private Grantmaking Foundations

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,267,155
Expenses
$4,822,243
Assets
$5,928,545
Liabilities
$1,844,062

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JUSTIN TRUMAN (PRESIDENT)
  • ONDRAUS JENKINS (FORMER BOARD PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHRISTINE EDWARDS (DIRECTOR, BUNGIE FOUNDATION DIR.): $297,252 total reported compensation
  • JARROD LUTY (SENIOR PRODUCER): $229,993 total reported compensation
  • AUSTIN SCHLICHTMAN (SENIOR PROGRAM MANAGER): $218,707 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 bungie foundation reduces distress and suffering in children through entertainment and partners with humanitarian aid organizations in times of natural disaster and crisis.

What it reported doing in 2024

The bungie foundation partners with make-a-wish Alaska & Washington chapter to grant wishes in two ways - we host children and their families at bungie to give them an exclusive tour of our facilities, as well as allow them to actively participate in bungie activities such as motion capture, voice recording, gameplay, and one on one lessons with our staff. The second way in which we grant wishes is by purchasing and facilitating the delivery/installment of all electronic wishes for the Alaska & Washington chapter.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 90% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 86% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 71
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 59.2%; rating input score 59
  • Program expense ratio: 75.7%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: $16.21 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 21st 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 23.1%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.23; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.31; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.2%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 113.6% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 67.9% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 36.4% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 59.2% of revenue deployed · 75.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 11 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $3.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $297K · 14 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $132K reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 73 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 27 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 59/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 53/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 44/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 33/100.