Quick charity verification for John Sage Foundation (EIN: 10469155)
Verdict: John Sage Foundation appears trustworthy
95/100Mission Score
$2.4MRevenue
$3.6MAssets
2Red Flags
5Strengths
Red Flags
NTEE Code Unknown: Lack of NTEE code makes it difficult to categorize and compare the organization's mission and activities.
Extremely Low Expenses Relative to Revenue: While positive for efficiency, such low expenses (e.g., $130,975 vs. $2,557,895 revenue in 202407) could indicate that the organization primarily acts as a holding entity or grantmaker rather than directly operating programs, or that significant in-kind contributions are not fully reflected in expenses.
Strengths
Exceptional Financial Health: Consistently high revenues relative to expenses, leading to significant asset growth (from $557,213 in 2012 to $3,354,594 in 2024).
Strong Asset Accumulation: Assets have grown substantially over the years, indicating effective financial management and investment.
Minimal Liabilities: Liabilities are consistently reported as extremely low ($1 in recent years), demonstrating a very strong balance sheet.
No Officer Compensation: The consistent reporting of 0% officer compensation across all filings is a significant strength, indicating a strong commitment to directing funds towards the mission rather than executive salaries.
High Spending Efficiency: The ratio of expenses to revenue is remarkably low, suggesting that a very high percentage of incoming funds are retained or used for direct mission-related activities, even without a detailed expense breakdown.
Spending Breakdown
How John Sage Foundation allocates its funds across programs, administration, and fundraising.
90%
Program Spending
Healthy — majority goes to mission
5%
Admin Costs
Reasonable — admin costs in check
5%
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 John Sage Foundation
Is John Sage Foundation a legitimate charity?
Based on AI analysis of IRS 990 filings, John Sage Foundation (EIN: 10469155) appears trustworthy. Mission Score: 95/100. 2 red flags identified, 5 strengths noted.
Is John Sage Foundation a good charity to donate to?
John Sage Foundation has a Mission Score of 95/100. Revenue: $2.4M. Assets: $3.6M. Review the full transparency report for detailed spending breakdown and executive compensation analysis.
What is the EIN for John Sage Foundation?
The Employer Identification Number (EIN) for John Sage Foundation is 10469155. 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 John Sage Foundation spend its money?
John Sage Foundation allocates 90% to programs, 5% to administration, and 5% to fundraising. Healthy nonprofits typically spend 75%+ on programs.
How can I verify John Sage Foundation's tax-exempt status?
You can verify John Sage Foundation's tax-exempt status using EIN 10469155 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 John Sage Foundation demonstrates exceptional financial health and spending efficiency, particularly in recent years. For the fiscal period ending 202407, the organization reported revenues of $2,557,895 against expenses of only $130,975, indicating a significant surplus that has contributed to a steady growth in assets, reaching $3,354,594. This trend of high revenue relative to expenses is consistent across the last few periods, with 202307 showing revenues of $1,786,537 against expenses of $108,180. The foundation's liabilities have consistently been minimal, often reported as $1, suggesting a very strong balance sheet and prudent financial management. The absence of reported officer compensation further enhances its transparency and commitment to directing funds towards its mission.
Given the extremely low reported expenses relative to revenue, it appears the foundation either operates with a very lean structure, relies heavily on volunteer efforts, or primarily functions as a grant-making entity with minimal operational overhead. The consistent growth in assets from $557,213 in 2012 to over $3.3 million in 2024, alongside minimal liabilities, points to a well-managed endowment or investment strategy. However, without a detailed breakdown of expenses into program, administrative, and fundraising categories, it's challenging to precisely determine the exact spending efficiency ratios, though the overall expense level is remarkably low.
The lack of reported officer compensation across all filings is a strong indicator of transparency and a focus on mission over executive benefits. The consistent and minimal liabilities also speak to sound financial practices. While the NTEE code is unknown, the financial data suggests a highly efficient organization, though more granular expense data would provide a clearer picture of program delivery versus other costs.