Trust Uw Cf Kellogg

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
136788755
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2122502500
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$137,303
Expenses
$42,098
Assets
$1,565,284
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

1 person listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Provides funds to charities (bard college & assn of episcopal colleges) as directed in the trust instrument

What it reported doing in 2025

Association of espiscopal colleges

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 77% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 6
  • Sustainability: 84
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 80.3%; rating input score 80
  • Program expense ratio: 83.4%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 90%; rating input score 90; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: Limited
  • Governance controls: 1 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: Limited
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 69.3%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 37.18; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 31.5%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.2% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.3% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 80.3% of revenue deployed · 83.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $35K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $13K · 1 people listed
  • Consistency: 12 of 13 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.