Spending Breakdown
How Thomas S Elmore 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
0%
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.
AI Transparency Report
The Thomas S Elmore Foundation exhibits highly inconsistent financial activity, making a clear assessment of its financial health challenging. While the organization reported a significant revenue spike of $190,078 in 2023, its revenue in other years has been extremely low, often in the double or triple digits, such as $987 in the latest period and $23 in 2021. This volatility suggests an unpredictable funding model. Despite the fluctuating revenue, the foundation consistently maintains a low expense base, with expenses ranging from $13,508 in 2020 to $58,525 in 2023. The organization's assets have also shown considerable fluctuation, from a high of $396,138 in 2013 to a low of $16,789 in 2019, currently standing at $159,847. The consistent reporting of $1 in liabilities in recent years (2019-2023) indicates a healthy balance sheet with minimal debt. The absence of officer compensation across all reported periods suggests a volunteer-driven leadership, which can be a positive indicator of efficiency and dedication to the mission, though it also raises questions about the sustainability of operations without paid staff.
Spending efficiency appears to be strong in years with higher revenue, as seen in 2023 where expenses ($58,525) were significantly lower than revenue ($190,078), leading to a substantial surplus. However, in many other years, expenses have exceeded the meager revenue, indicating reliance on prior assets or inconsistent funding. The lack of detailed expense breakdowns in the provided data makes it difficult to precisely determine program spending versus administrative or fundraising costs. However, the overall low expense figures, coupled with zero officer compensation, suggest that a significant portion of the limited funds available is likely directed towards the organization's mission rather than overhead.
Transparency is generally good, with 10 years of IRS 990 filings available, indicating compliance with reporting requirements. The consistent reporting of zero officer compensation enhances transparency regarding how funds are allocated at the leadership level. However, without more granular expense data from the filings, a complete picture of spending efficiency across different categories (programs, administration, fundraising) remains somewhat obscured. The extreme fluctuations in revenue and assets over time, while reported, could benefit from further explanation to stakeholders regarding the foundation's long-term financial strategy and sustainability.