The Jeffersons Rotary Club Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
260587264
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2009
Forms available
Form 990 2009
Location
Jefferson, NC, USA
Phone
3363841358
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Community Service Clubs

Reported finances

Revenue
$94,368
Expenses
$20,512
Assets
$105,650
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2009. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2009. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Scholarships and community service

What it reported doing in 2009

The foundation supported a local project called imagination library for the 2009-2010 fiscal year. The project spawned from a concept created by dolly parton to provide one book each month to preschool aged children to foster an early interest in books and reading. Proponents of the project have now formed a nonprofit entity to promote its mission, so this foundation will not need to support it in the future.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 85% 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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 78
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 75th 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 78.3%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.15; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $20K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 15 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.

Key Signals

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

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.