Is James G Hart Foundation Legit?

Strengths

Consistent 0% reported officer compensation, indicating very low administrative overhead for executive pay.
Substantial and growing asset base, increasing from $1.4 million in 2011 to over $14 million currently, providing financial stability.
Extremely low liabilities, often reported as $1, demonstrating strong financial management and minimal debt.
Consistent IRS 990 filing history over a decade, indicating good compliance and transparency.
Significant latest revenue of $5,421,511, suggesting strong recent financial support or investment returns.

Spending Breakdown

How James G Hart Foundation allocates its funds across programs, administration, and fundraising.

90%

Program Spending

Healthy — majority goes to mission

10%

Admin Costs

Reasonable — admin costs in check

Fundraising

Within typical range

How to read this: Well-run charities typically spend 75% or more on programs, keep admin under 25%, and fundraising under 15%. A high program ratio means more of every dollar goes directly to the mission.

How to Interpret This Report

What Red Flags Mean

Red flags are potential warning signs identified by AI analysis of IRS 990 filings. They may indicate issues like declining revenue, high executive pay relative to program spending, lack of transparency, or governance concerns. A single red flag does not necessarily mean an organization is untrustworthy, but multiple flags warrant further investigation before donating.

What Mission Score Measures

The Mission Score (0-100) evaluates how effectively a nonprofit fulfills its stated purpose. It combines multiple factors: program spending efficiency (how much goes to programs vs. overhead), financial health and sustainability, governance quality, transparency in reporting, and consistency of operations over time. A score of 70+ indicates strong alignment with the organization’s mission.

Using This Data for Donation Decisions

Use this report as one input in your decision. Look at the overall Mission Score for a quick assessment, review red flags and strengths for specific concerns, check the spending breakdown to see where money goes, and compare executive compensation to the organization’s size. Consider viewing the full transparency report for deeper analysis, and always verify tax-exempt status with the IRS before making large donations.

Frequently Asked Questions about James G Hart Foundation

Is James G Hart Foundation a legitimate charity?

Based on AI analysis of IRS 990 filings, James G Hart Foundation (EIN: 200254015) appears trustworthy. Mission Score: 85/100. 1 red flag identified, 5 strengths noted.

Is James G Hart Foundation a good charity to donate to?

James G Hart Foundation has a Mission Score of 85/100. Revenue: $5.4M. Assets: $14.2M. Review the full transparency report for detailed spending breakdown and executive compensation analysis.

What is the EIN for James G Hart Foundation?

The Employer Identification Number (EIN) for James G Hart Foundation is 200254015. This is the unique tax ID assigned by the IRS.

What is a Mission Score?

The Mission Score is a 0-100 rating that measures how effectively a nonprofit fulfills its stated mission. It factors in program spending efficiency, financial transparency, governance practices, and outcome reporting. Scores above 70 indicate strong mission alignment, 40-69 suggest mixed performance, and below 40 signals potential concerns.

How does James G Hart Foundation spend its money?

James G Hart Foundation allocates 90% to programs, 10% to administration, and 0% to fundraising. Healthy nonprofits typically spend 75%+ on programs.

How can I verify James G Hart Foundation's tax-exempt status?

You can verify James G Hart Foundation's tax-exempt status using EIN 200254015 on the IRS Tax Exempt Organization Search (TEOS) at apps.irs.gov/app/eos. You can also request copies of their Form 990 directly from the organization, as they are required by law to provide them upon request.

AI Transparency Report

The James G Hart Foundation demonstrates a consistent commitment to its mission, as evidenced by its historical financial data. The organization has maintained extremely low liabilities, often reporting only $1, which indicates strong financial management and a lack of significant debt. While revenue has fluctuated, with a notable peak of $1,538,428 in 2021 and a recent high of $5,421,511, the foundation has generally managed its expenses within reasonable bounds, though some years show expenses exceeding revenue, such as in 2023 ($826,397 expenses vs. $730,465 revenue) and 2022 ($925,378 expenses vs. $551,124 revenue). This suggests that the foundation may be drawing on its substantial asset base, which has grown significantly from $1.4 million in 2011 to over $14 million currently, to support its operations during periods of lower income.

The foundation's spending efficiency appears to be strong, particularly given the consistent reporting of 0% officer compensation across all available filings. This indicates that the organization's leadership is either unpaid or compensated through other means not categorized as officer compensation, which can be a positive sign for donor confidence regarding administrative overhead. The substantial growth in assets, from $1,463,212 in 2011 to $14,195,021 currently, suggests effective asset management and potentially successful investment strategies or significant contributions over time. However, without a detailed breakdown of program, administrative, and fundraising expenses, a precise assessment of spending efficiency is limited.

In terms of transparency, the consistent filing of IRS Form 990s over a decade is a positive indicator. The absence of officer compensation is a notable point of transparency regarding executive pay. To further enhance transparency, providing more detailed breakdowns of how expenses are allocated across programs, administration, and fundraising would be beneficial for stakeholders seeking a deeper understanding of the foundation's operational efficiency and direct impact.

Verdict: James G Hart Foundation appears trustworthy

Red Flags