How does Charity Navigator score Tunnel to Towers on financial health and accountability?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Charity Navigator currently lists the Stephen Siller Tunnel to Towers Foundation with a top 4/4 star rating, signaling strong performance under its financial and accountability metrics, while also noting limits to its Culture & Community evaluation because the charity has not submitted constituent feedback data [1]. The foundation and secondary reporting emphasize consecutive years of four‑star status and a perfect Accountability & Transparency score, but the picture is best understood as a snapshot of specific financial and transparency indicators rather than a full multidimensional endorsement [2] [3].
1. What Charity Navigator’s 4‑star means in practice
A 4/4 star designation on Charity Navigator indicates that the Tunnel to Towers Foundation met the evaluator’s thresholds for financial health and accountability and transparency as Charity Navigator measures them; the site explicitly shows Tunnel to Towers has earned a four‑star rating and has received perfect scores in Accountability & Transparency categories in past announcements [1] [2]. Charity Navigator’s historic ratings mainly reflected financial and accountability metrics before its broader methodologies were introduced, and the organization also uses indicators such as whether audited financial statements are published and whether a charity’s website is listed on its IRS Form 990 as part of its transparency checks [1].
2. Limits and caveats flagged by the evaluator
Charity Navigator’s entry for Tunnel to Towers notes a specific limitation: the foundation “cannot currently be evaluated by our Culture & Community methodology because we have not received data from the charity regarding its Constituent Feedback,” which means some newer or qualitative dimensions of Charity Navigator’s rating framework are not applied to the organization at this time [1]. Separately, Charity Navigator’s evolving methodology means legacy 4‑star ratings may reflect a narrower historical standard tied heavily to financial and accountability signals rather than newer leadership, impact, or community feedback measures [1].
3. How the foundation presents the rating
Tunnel to Towers prominently publicizes the Charity Navigator four‑star rating across its financials and press materials, framing the designation as validation of “sound fiscal management, organizational efficiency, and program integrity” and noting multi‑year runs of top ratings—statements that appear on the foundation’s own financials page and press releases [4] [3]. The foundation and affiliated outreach materials also cite consecutive years of four‑star ratings—some materials claim seven years, others refer to a longer run—indicating consistent messaging aimed at donors and partners [3] [5].
4. Independent corroboration and program spending context
Independent watchdog CharityWatch provides corroborating praise for Tunnel to Towers’ fiscal allocation, assigning an A+ and reporting that the foundation spent approximately 93% of cash expenses on programs with overhead around 7% and a low cost to raise $100—figures derived from CharityWatch’s analysis of the foundation’s IRS Form 990 and audited statements for a given year [6]. Those CharityWatch figures bolster the interpretation that a high share of cash outlays go to program services, a factor that aligns with Charity Navigator’s finance‑oriented scoring approach [6].
5. Reading the rating with skepticism and context
While a four‑star Charity Navigator score and an A+ from CharityWatch are strong indicators of financial stewardship and transparency to date, they do not alone measure program impact, beneficiary satisfaction, or long‑term adaptability; Charity Navigator itself flags missing constituent feedback and notes its historical emphasis on accountability and finance [1]. The foundation’s promotional use of the rating is expected and serves donor relations; readers should therefore treat the rating as one important signal among several—financial health and transparency metrics are necessary but not sufficient to fully evaluate a charity’s performance [4] [3].
6. Bottom line
Charity Navigator scores Tunnel to Towers at the highest available level for the metrics it currently applies, and independent reporting from CharityWatch corroborates high program spending percentages and efficiency claims, but the evaluator also discloses methodological gaps—most notably the absence of constituent feedback data—so the 4/4 star rating should be interpreted as strong evidence of fiscal responsibility and transparency rather than a comprehensive assessment of impact or community experience [1] [6].