Greater Milwaukee Committee for Community Development
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 390749512
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Milwaukee, WI, USA
- Phone
- 4142720588
- Rating
- 76
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,100,234
- Expenses
- $2,079,793
- Assets
- $2,008,682
- Liabilities
- $919,528
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
28 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Joel Brennan (President)
- Cristy Garcia-Thomas (Interim President)
Highest reported compensation
- Joel Brennan (President): $438,874 total reported compensation
- Langston Verdin (Director of Community Partnerships Strategy): $154,780 total reported compensation
- Heather Pechacek (Membership Communications Director): $122,032 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Greater Milwaukee Committee is a private sector civic organization that aims to contribute to the cultural and economic base of the Milwaukee area. Continued on Schedule O.
What it reported doing in 2025
Fiscal Strength and Innovation Thriving communities are built on a foundation of effective, efficient and fiscally secure public services supported and leveraged by robust businesses and civic organizations. GMC and its members work in collaboration with the public sector to forge a sustainable path for government services. Government representatives and their civic partners seek creative long-term solutions that will promote equitable delivery of services and economic vitality that can be accessed by all in the community.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 67% for direct work, and 33% for grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 71
- Transparency & Controls: 73
- Accountability: 98
- Sustainability: 27
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 75.7%; rating input score 76
- Program expense ratio: 76%; rating input score 76
- Fundraising efficiency: $8.41 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 99.1%; rating input score 99; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 96.2%; rating input score 96; 26th 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: 1%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.97; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.46; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 34.4%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 1% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 75.7% of revenue deployed · 76% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 25 of 26 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.6M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $439K · 28 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $109K reported
- Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2011 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 14 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 30/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 30/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.