Bayview Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
396092644
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Madison, WI, USA
Phone
6082567808
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,543,073
Expenses
$2,093,152
Assets
$25,832,626
Liabilities
$110,009

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARY BERRYMAN AGARD (PRESIDENT)
  • SALLI MARTINIYAK (VICE-PRESIDENT)
  • ALEXIS LONDON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ALEXIS LONDON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $171,454 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The bayview foundation supports its culturally diverse, low-income families in realizing their aspirations by providing affordable housing, fostering cultural pride, and building community through the arts, education, and recreation.

What it reported doing in 2025

Bayview's centrally located community center provides social, recreational, educational and cultural programs to bayview residents as well as the triangle and monona bay neighborhoods at large. Thousands of residents are served by center services each year. In 2025, bayview's food pantry provided 120,000 pounds of food to families in need and provided over 3,200 program hours in out of school programming, food access, senior and adult programs and mental health support.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 51
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 84
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 40.2%; rating input score 40
  • Program expense ratio: 72%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: $12.15 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 53.9%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 12.34; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.2%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.3% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 24.3% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 40.2% of revenue deployed · 72% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $171K · 12 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 40/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 43/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 40/100.