The Portage Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
341176817
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Kent, OH, USA
Phone
3304708950
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$527,427
Expenses
$331,246
Assets
$7,790,037
Liabilities
$1,536,232

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KAMELIA FISHER (PRESIDENT)
  • DEBBIE SMEILES (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • ERIC DECKER (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JANICE SIMMONS-MORTIMER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JANICE SIMMONS-MORTIMER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $48,760 total reported compensation
  • MARY ANNE ZEMAN (OPERATIONS MANAGER): $30,785 total reported compensation
  • HEIDI JOHNSON (COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT MANAGER): $22,823 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The portage foundation inspires, impacts, and engages the portage county community by ensuring pathways of enduring support to meet local needs. We are committed to integrity and accountability in connecting donors with recipients, fostering meaningful giving that strengthens our community.

What it reported doing in 2024

Donor servicesthe portage foundation manages more than 75 funds established by individuals, corporations, and organizations to address community needs through both donor-advised and discretionary grantmaking. Fund options include unrestricted, field of interest, donor advised, scholarship, designated, and nonprofit agency funds. Assets are professionally managed with oversight from an investment advisory committee to ensure long-term sustainability of grantmaking and community leadership. The foundation also serves as a resource hub, connecting donors with qualified nonprofits in portage county, supporting organizational capacity, and conducting due diligence to ensure all beneficiaries are IRS-recognized charities. Services provided include fund statements, grant evaluations, planned giving support, and acknowledgment and documentation of all contributions and grants. The foundation is committed to excellence in donor service and to helping donors achieve their philanthropic goals.

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 75% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 74
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 55%; rating input score 55
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.2 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 46%; rating input score 46; 28th 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: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 37.2%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 23.52; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.2; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 30.9%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.6% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -6.4% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.6% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 76% of revenue deployed · 55% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $182K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $49K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 55/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 46/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 10/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.