The Connecticut Community Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
066038074
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-T 2025
Location
Waterbury, CT, USA
Phone
2037531315
Rating
87
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Community Foundations

Reported finances

Revenue
$15,175,996
Expenses
$13,510,473
Assets
$200,140,435
Liabilities
$924,805

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

Leadership & pay

23 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KATHY TAYLOR (PRESIDENT & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • KATHY TAYLOR (PRESIDENT & CEO): $266,995 total reported compensation
  • BARBARA RYER (DIRECTOR OF FINANCE): $173,639 total reported compensation
  • CYNTHIA MERRICK (DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT): $152,712 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To foster an equitable and inclusive community in greater waterbury and litchfield hills by inspiring generosity, supporting organizations, and cultivating effective leaders. The foundation works to address the community's critical issues, funds programs benefiting local residents, supports efforts to improve systems to foster more equitable outcomes for residents, strengthens local organizations through learning and outreach, and works with individuals, families and corporations to steward charitable and scholarship funds.

What it reported doing in 2025

Supporting nonprofit organizations in greater waterbury and the litchfield hills for programs and services in the arts, health, older adults, education, environment, social services and women's issues; providing scholarships for college students; strengthening nonprofit organizations through grants and technical assistance programs; and providing leadership to address critical issues in our communities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 86% of its reported program spending out as 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 72
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87.6%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 90.3%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $20.63 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 81.4%; rating input score 81; 23rd 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 11%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 14.81; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.3%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.7% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 87.6% of revenue deployed · 90.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $12.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $267K · 23 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 35 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 244 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 238 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 55/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 55/100.