The John Crerar Foundation C/o the John Crerar Library

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
363155157
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
3127155122
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$21,375
Expenses
$35,000
Assets
$1,136,497
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PATRICK J BITTERMAN (PRESIDENT & DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • JANICE E RODGERS (DIRECTOR)
  • PATRICK J BITTERMAN (PRESIDENT & DIRECTOR)
  • DAVID LOWENTHAL (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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The organization's mission is to provide financial support to the john crerar library (the "library") in the form of grants made not less often than annually. The library is the science, medicine and technology component of the university of chicago library system. Virtually all of the organization's income is used in furtherance of this mission.

What it reported doing in 2025

This grant to the library provides support for the preservation and cataloging of the historic crerar collection. The books, articles and related items that comprise the historic crerar collection are the documents that formed the centerpiece of the original john crerar library. These items, some of which are more than one hundred years old, now are in the care and custody of the crerar library at the university of chicago. This grant will support the ongoing preservation of the historic crerar collection and will make it more accessible through enhanced cataloging. This is expected to be a multi-year project.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 51
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: -63.7%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 32.47; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $35K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 11 of 11 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2015 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.