The Minneapolis Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 416029402
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Minneapolis, MN, US
- Phone
- (612) 672-3878
- Rating
- 87
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Community Foundations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $192,988,402
- Expenses
- $152,448,966
- Assets
- $1,185,664,206
- Liabilities
- $80,355,721
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
44 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- RT RYBAK (PRESIDENT & CEO)
- CHRISTOPHER BEACH (SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, PHILANTHROPIC SERVICES)
- JO-ANNE STATELY (SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT OF IMPACT)
- PATRICE RELERFORD (VICE PRESIDENT OF COLLECTIVE IMPACT AND GIVING)
- COLLEEN HASE (VICE PRESIDENT OF TECHNOLOGY AND ENTERPRISE RISK M)
- MILPHA BLAMO (VICE PRESIDENT FOR TALENT AND CULTURE)
Highest reported compensation
- RT RYBAK (PRESIDENT & CEO): $477,199 total reported compensation
- CHRISTOPHER BEACH (SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, PHILANTHROPIC SERVICES): $342,841 total reported compensation
- JO-ANNE STATELY (SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT OF IMPACT): $319,353 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To realize strong, vibrant communities.
What it reported doing in 2024
The minneapolis foundation is one of the oldest and largest community foundations in the nation. Established in 1915, the foundation cultivates generosity by taking action on the greatest civic, social, and economic needs partnering with nonprofits, facilitating grantmaking, driving research and advocacy, and providing services to donors seeking to make a difference in their communities. As a community foundation, we invest and distribute grants from charitable funds established by members of the community. Today, we manage more than $1 billion in assets and administer more than 1,500 charitable funds created by individuals, families, businesses, and nonprofits. Millions of dollars in grants are distributed from these funds each year (see part 1, line 13), either personally advised by or in accordance with the legacy wishes of our donors. We also steward a permanent charitable endowment and distribute the income from it to benefit the community. The foundation creates intersections in civic life that foster a generous community of donors, organizations, staff, volunteers, and residents who listen, learn, and take responsive action to address pressing needs. We support donors and partners as they express their generosity personally, collectively, and across generations. We invest in community-shaped and community-driven solutions using all available tools and resources. We use our access and influence to amplify and elevate the voices and leadership of others. We create measurable meaning and impact across our work through research, evaluation, and knowledge-sharing. We demonstrate philanthropic and organizational excellence in impact, integrity, and innovation. During the year ended march 31, 2025, the minneapolis foundation received more than $130 million in gifts and awarded more than $125 million in total grants. Our donors advised more than $92 million in grants to causes locally and around the united states. The foundation distributed community grants totaling over $13 million. The remaining grants were from a variety of funds including corporate employee assistance funds, scholarships, designated funds and others. More information about the minneapolis foundation can be found at www.minneapolisfoundation.org.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 81% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 91% 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. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filed totals do not add up.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 89
- Transparency & Controls: 75
- Accountability: 98
- Sustainability: 85
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 90.4%; rating input score 90
- Program expense ratio: 93%; rating input score 93
- Fundraising efficiency: $36.42 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
- Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
- Requires narrative reports: Fail
- Conducts field audits: Fail
- May suspend future funding: Fail
- Requires financial reports: Fail
- Conducts site visits: Fail
- Requires grant agreements: Fail
- May require repayment: Fail
- Grant itemization coverage: 99.3%; rating input score 99; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 96.9%; rating input score 97; 52nd 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: 21%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.78; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 1.7%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 7.8% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 7.1% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 13 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 90.4% of revenue deployed · 93% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 31 of 32 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $141.8M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $477K · 44 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.6M reported
- Consistency: 42 of 44 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1574 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 1559 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.