The Foundation of the St Andrew's Society of Philadelphia
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 236291406
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Phone
- 2152053336
- Rating
- 66
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,563,178
- Expenses
- $283,736
- Assets
- $6,980,133
- Liabilities
- $97,500
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
14 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Richard Francis Pagano (President)
- John F McDonald III (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- Richard Francis Pagano (President)
- John F McDonald III (Vice President)
- Kenneth W MacNeal (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
College scholarship funding-U.S./Scotland
What it reported doing in 2024
Promoted understanding between the United States and Scotland by awarding scholarships to carefully selected students in the Philadelphia region to study in Scotland, and to carefully selected students in Scotland to study in the United States. Each year, the Foundation contacts 30 colleges and universities in the region surrounding the Philadelphia area, and delivers the Foundations application for scholarship for attendance abroad at one of four Scottish universities. The candidate must rank academically in the top 25% of his/her class, be nominated by their school Dean or foreign study head, be involved in his/her school community, and willing to spend an entire academic year abroad at a Scottish educational institution. Each applicant must provide a personal essay, letters of recommendation, and transcript in support of his/her candidacy to the Scholarship Committee. Nominees will be invited to be interviewed by the Foundations scholarship committee. Nominees are questioned to discover which applicants will represent the Foundation and experience the culture, history, and character of Scotland at their chosen university should they be awarded a scholarship. Committee members independently rank each candidate using a scoring rubric, from which the winning candidates are selected for awards. Based on their ranking by the committee, the top scorer receives first choice for a Scottish university, etc. Personnel at the Scottish universities execute a similar vetting process, and select award winners to attend colleges in the Philadelphia area.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 87% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 98% of its reported program spending out as grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 50
- Transparency & Controls: 71
- Accountability: 76
- Sustainability: 92
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 26%; rating input score 26
- Program expense ratio: 74.7%; rating input score 75
- Fundraising efficiency: $302.62 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
- Grant itemization coverage: 96%; rating input score 96; 43rd 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: Fail
- 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: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 81.8%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 24.6; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 13.4% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 6.8% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 26% of revenue deployed · 74.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $212K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 14 people listed
- Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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 26/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.