The Springboard Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
364482332
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2019
Forms available
Form 990 2019
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
3126168000
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$328,965
Expenses
$475,058
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Keith Kizziah (President)
  • Doug Armstrong (Vice President)
  • Andrew Flynn (President (Until 11/2019))

Highest reported compensation

  • Jessica Strausbaugh (Treasurer): $278,031 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the Springboard Foundation is to provide financial and intellectual capital to selected "grass roots" charitable programs that otherwise would have difficulty obtaining financial support. Springboard's primary focus is afterschool and supplemental education programs. Since inception, Springboard has helped numerous programs grow and become self-sustaining, so that they can continue to provide Chicago public school students with educational and out-of-school activities that are so critical to personal growth and success. In addition to contributing funds to Springboard, Springboard members go on site visits to meet nonprofit leaders and see their programs in action. During the year, members maintain contact with the nonprofits and marshal all of the resources at their disposal time, treasure, knowledge, and network to ensure that they grow into sustainable organizations.

What it reported doing in 2019

The Springboard Foundation is a philanthropic grant making institution that supports the mission of The Chicago Community Trust and The Chicago Community Foundation through granting funds to charitable organizations within a designated class or purpose.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 86% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 97% 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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 94
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 8
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 91.1%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: $34.1 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 85.1%; rating input score 85; 47th 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: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -44.4%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.8%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.4% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -10.9% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -87.3% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 91.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $433K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $278K · 11 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2017 to 2019
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 12 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 20 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: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 6/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 42/100.