For-m Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
844165560
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
West Bend, WI, USA
Phone
4144844034
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Improvement, Capacity Building N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$734,338
Expenses
$682,857
Assets
$748,556
Liabilities
$691,659

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOSEPH POESCHL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • KATHY HENRICH (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • KATHY HENRICH (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $323,458 total reported compensation
  • JOSEPH POESCHL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $136,526 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Develop diverse sources of tech talent and startups from k-12, university, and non-traditional career pathways

What it reported doing in 2024

Talent reskilling/upskilling: we provide opportunities for upskilling and reskilling to expand both the capacity and diversity of our tech talent. Signature programs include tech apprenticeships a preferred provider reskilling network for non-traditional skills development, and ai upskilling. We leverage state and federal grants to offset the costs and risks so that employers can invest in reskilling and upskilling.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 61% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 46
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.8%; rating input score 79
  • Program expense ratio: 84.4%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $13.36 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 47; 47th 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: 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: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 7%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.1; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.92; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.6%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 17.2% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -9.8% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78.8% of revenue deployed · 84.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $576K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $323K · 15 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 47/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 55/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 46/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 51/100.