Cedar Community Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
391249432
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
West Bend, WI, USA
Phone
2623062100
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,672,939
Expenses
$1,194,112
Assets
$11,029,706
Liabilities
$402,191

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Lynn Olson (Director/CEO Cedar)
  • Dale Kent (President)
  • richard Eschner (Vice-President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Lynn Olson (Director/CEO Cedar): $303,870 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Cedar Community Foundation Board of Directors will act in all they do to support and maintain the Cedar Community's Mission and Vision Statement.

What it reported doing in 2016

Cedar Community Foundation provides financial assistance to Benevolent Corporation Cedar Community, a related organization, in the operation of its programs in South Eastern Wisconsin, including the provision of skilled nursing services, rehabilitation, assisted living, retirement housing, home based services and retreat services. The foundation solicits, receives, invests and distributes financial assets exclusively for the benefit of Cedar Community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 83% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 84
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 97.6%; rating input score 98
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 28.6%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 9.24; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.4%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -39.5% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.6% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.4% per year; rating input score 0; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 97.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 14 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $304K · 14 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2009 to 2016
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.