Greater Green Bay Community Foundation
Legal name: Greater Green Bay Community Foundation Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 391699966
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Green Bay, WI, US
- Phone
- 920-432-0800
- Rating
- 87
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Community Foundations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $32,726,253
- Expenses
- $31,000,254
- Assets
- $182,778,538
- Liabilities
- $40,204,896
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
28 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DENNIS BUEHLER (PRESIDENT/CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- DENNIS BUEHLER (PRESIDENT/CEO): $213,466 total reported compensation
- JONATHAN J KUBICK CPA (CFO (THRU APR 2025)): $157,819 total reported compensation
- AMBER PALUCH (SENIOR VP - COMMUNITY IMPACT): $117,843 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Our volunteer board of directors is made up of engaged leaders of the greater Green Bay community. They come from varied backgrounds, and each lends unique talents to help advance the mission of the Greater Green Bay Community Foundation.
What it reported doing in 2024
Actively partnering with community members and granting to charitable organizations who serve to support arts and culture, animal welfare, basic needs and human services, education, health and wellness, environment, public benefit, community improvement and youth development.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 61% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 60% 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 90
- Transparency & Controls: 81
- Accountability: 93
- Sustainability: 67
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 91.4%; rating input score 91
- Program expense ratio: 89.8%; rating input score 90
- Fundraising efficiency: $69.68 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 1st 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: 95.1%; rating input score 95; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 95.8%; rating input score 96; 29th 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: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 5.3%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.9; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.22; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 1.9%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 14.2% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 10.8% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 7.7% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 91.4% of revenue deployed · 89.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 23 of 24 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $27.8M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $213K · 28 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $8M reported
- Consistency: 34 of 36 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 351 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 342 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.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 55/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 56/100.