The College of Staten Island Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
133683723
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Staten Island, NY, USA
Phone
7189822365
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,452,851
Expenses
$2,190,051
Assets
$24,557,259
Liabilities
$730,401

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

Leadership & pay

23 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHERYL ADOLPH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • MICHAEL CUSICK (PRESIDENT)
  • JOSEPH FRANZESE (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • CHERYL ADOLPH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • JACQUELINE ARMANI (DIRECTOR)
  • COMFORT ASANBE ((EX-OFFICIO) DIRECTOR)

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

The foundation was established to stimulate and strengthen community, corporate and foundation support for public higher education on staten island and to support the college of staten island in providing its students with the finest facilities and faculty available.

What it reported doing in 2024

These expenses represent the foundation's accomplishments in assisting the college of staten island by developing an ongoing and increasing base of support from the community, individuals, corporations and foundations. Through this philanthropic support, the college of staten island foundation allows the college to expand its margin of excellence which ensures its students, faculty, and staff the finest academic facilities available. Such examples include funding for the chazanoff school of business expenses related to the association to advance collegiate schools of business (aacsb) accreditation process, career development initiatives, the athletics program, including uniforms and travel related to participation in tournaments, facility improvements which this past year included a new student lounge, support for the library and for the department of social work.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 74% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 45% for direct work, and 55% for 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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 88
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 71.4%; rating input score 71
  • Program expense ratio: 80.9%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $132.91 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 89; 89th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 36.6%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 11.21; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.5% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 71.4% of revenue deployed · 80.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 22 of 22 board members independent · 7 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 23 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.