Down Syndrome Association of Wisconsin Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 391681338
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Wauwatosa, WI, USA
- Phone
- 4143273729
- Rating
- 82
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Developmentally Disabled Centers
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $7,911,923
- Expenses
- $6,386,342
- Assets
- $6,030,885
- Liabilities
- $703,236
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JULIE AGUILAR (PRESIDENT)
- WENDY BUSHELL (VICE PRESIDENT)
- DAWN NUOFFER (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- DAWN NUOFFER (CEO): $195,773 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The mission at the down syndrome association of Wisconsin (dsaw) is to provide support to Wisconsin families and individuals with down syndrome and related disabilities through education, information, programs, services, and the exchange of ideas and experiences.
What it reported doing in 2024
Family services: to provide rehabilitation services to outside clients with down syndrome and related disabilities. Under this program, they also provide home and community services as well as employment services described below.home and community services: children under 18 can utilize children's long term support waiver (clts) to pay for services. Dsaw has contracts with each county where we provide services that lists the maximum dollar amount of services we can provide per year in that county, along with compliance requirements. Then for each individual who we provide services for, we contact their caseworker and receive an authorization to provide services. This authorization lists dates, the type of service to be provided, the units authorized and the unit cost. At the end of each month, dsaw sends the county an invoice for the services that were provided. Adults 18+ can utilize either iris or family care to pay for services. Iris is a self-directed program, and dsaw is an iris provider. Individuals receive a budget and can direct dollars towards services. Fiscal agents (such as ilife and premier), receive the funds from the state and help participants manage their budgets. If individuals choose dsaw, we contact the individual's fiscal agent and receive an authorization with dates, the type of service to be provided, the units authorized and the unit cost. At the end of each month, dsaw sends the fiscal agent an invoice for the services that were provided. Adults 18+ also have a secondary program to choose from, called family care. They work alongside their care manager, rn, guardian and any other idt member that is involved at that time. Dsaw is contracted with a few of the managed care organizations that serve the family care funded program. If the individual adds a service to their plan and dsaw is the chosen service provider, then we receive an authorization and bill for the service at the end of the month. Employment services: dsaw receives referrals to work with individuals directly from the department of workforce development's department of vocational rehabilitation (dvr). Dsaw is a dvr provider in several wdas. Dsaw completes services per the instructions on the referral, and then sends dvr an invoice at the end of each month for the services that were provided.
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 97% 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
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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 77
- Transparency & Controls: 76
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 61
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 70.7%; rating input score 71
- Program expense ratio: 87.3%; rating input score 87
- Fundraising efficiency: $44.16 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100
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: 19.3%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.94; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 3.1%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 28.6% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 27.8% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 23.4% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 70.7% of revenue deployed · 87.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $5.6M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $196K · 8 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $775K reported
- Consistency: 41 of 41 current checks pass
- Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 11 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.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 56/100.