The Springfield Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 316030764
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-T 2025
- Location
- Springfield, OH, USA
- Phone
- 9373248773
- Rating
- 71
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Community Foundations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $18,699,754
- Expenses
- $5,349,742
- Assets
- $161,080,356
- Liabilities
- $75,472,294
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
24 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- STEPHEN MOODY (PRESIDENT)
- AMANDA LANTZ (VICE PRESIDENT)
- SUSAN CAREY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- SUSAN CAREY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $170,885 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Our mission is to raise, strengthen, and distribute permanent charitable funds to improve the quality of life for residents of clark county.
What it reported doing in 2025
The springfield foundation partners with individuals, families, and organizations to provide a permanent source of charitable capital to improve the quality of life of those in clark county, Ohio. These resources are strengthened through sound investment and diligent stewardship and are distributed as grants to non-profit organizations and as scholarships for students throughout the community.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 69% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 85% 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 most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 68
- Transparency & Controls: 56
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 86
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 65.9%; rating input score 66
- Program expense ratio: 80.1%; rating input score 80
- Fundraising efficiency: $14.06 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd 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: Scored; rating input score 0
- Grant itemization coverage: 88.4%; rating input score 88; 27th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 71.4%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 30.11; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.47; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 3.2%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -3.2% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 8.9% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 65.9% of revenue deployed · 80.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 23 of 23 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4.3M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $171K · 24 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 36 of 37 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2010 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 125 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 123 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 44/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 28/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.