The Pride Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 911325007
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Seattle, WA, USA
- Phone
- 2063233318
- Rating
- 88
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Lesbian, Gay Rights
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $10,549,999
- Expenses
- $9,312,043
- Assets
- $52,917,224
- Liabilities
- $2,215,362
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
28 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Kathryn Carter (CEO)
- Jason Bergevin (President)
- Carol Cheney (President)
- Christopher Coburn (President)
- Brandy Pirtle-Guiney (Vice President)
Highest reported compensation
- Kathryn Carter (CEO): $256,808 total reported compensation
- Jimbo Worm (Dir. of Finance): $204,362 total reported compensation
- Jose Romero (Dir. of Advoc.): $144,807 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Pride Foundation connects, inspires and strengthens the Pacific Northwest lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) community in pursuit of equality. They accomplish this in rural and urban areas by awarding grants and scholarships and cultivation leaders.
What it reported doing in 2024
SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM: Awarded scholarships to 113 students for post-secondary education, with funds paid directly to the institution of learning. Pride Foundation scholarships support education and leadership development to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and straight-ally students of any age or sexual orientation from Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, and Washington who are pursuing any post-secondary education (including community college, public or private colleges & universities, trade apprenticeships, or certificate programs)! LGBTQ students often do not have access to traditional means of support from families making it more compelling for organizations like ours to exist to support the educational endeavors of these students. Our scholarships have the power to make a huge financial and emotional impact on their lives.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 88% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 66% 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 90
- Transparency & Controls: 80
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 70
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 98.9%; rating input score 99
- Program expense ratio: 88.6%; rating input score 89
- Fundraising efficiency: $15.27 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 95.5%; rating input score 96; 25th 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: 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: 11.7%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.68; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 12%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 9.6% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 12.3% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 0% per year; rating input score 100; 10th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 98.9% of revenue deployed · 88.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $8.3M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $257K · 28 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 38 of 39 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 144 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 137 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 50/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.