CWI Works

Legal name: Cwi Works Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
526048236
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Silver Spring, MD, USA
Phone
301.578.8900
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Senior Centers

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$58,455,077
Expenses
$58,663,185
Assets
$27,000,623
Liabilities
$6,365,281

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

24 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GARY OFFICER (PRESIDENT & CEO)
  • CHRISTINE R GARLAND (VICE PRESIDENT OF WORKFORC)

Highest reported compensation

  • GARY OFFICER (PRESIDENT & CEO): $453,099 total reported compensation
  • SAMUEL GAILLARD (CFO): $323,617 total reported compensation
  • RITA SANTELLI (EVP, CHIEF GROWTH & COMM): $279,748 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide job training and placement for older workers, including veterans and those with limited transferable skills, while partnering with federal agencies and employers to create employment opportunities.

What it reported doing in 2024

Agriculture conservation experienced services (aces): this program is funded by the department of agriculture (usda) under title xii of the food security act and forestry service and authorized under the 2014 farm bill (h.r. 2642). The purpose of the program is to utilize the talents of experienced workers age 55 and older to provide technical assistance in conservation-related programs. For the years ended june 30, 2025 and 2024, aces experienced workers served in usda natural resources conservation service offices in Louisiana and puerto rico, with 20 and 19 experienced workers, respectively, as well as in forest service offices across Alabama, Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Idaho, Indiana, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, North Carolina, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Utah, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming, with approximately 94 and 116 experienced workers, respectively.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 100% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 60% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Revenue has declined or grown slowly and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 27
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 99.6%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.4%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.46; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.24; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.8%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0% per year; rating input score 100; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3.2% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.2% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 8 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 99.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 12 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $58.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $453K · 24 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $788K reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 64 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 51 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 25/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 17/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.