Interfaith Older Adult Programs Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
391217963
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Milwaukee, WI, USA
Phone
4142917500
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Senior Centers
Affiliation
Interfaith

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,145,608
Expenses
$7,079,757
Assets
$2,141,829
Liabilities
$434,556

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TIMOTHY KLARE (PRESIDENT)
  • DAVID PIFER (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • LISA BITTMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • LISA BITTMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $106,606 total reported compensation
  • YING CAI (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $38,754 total reported compensation
  • CATHY WOOD (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $17,664 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Linking older adults with a caring community.

What it reported doing in 2016

Interfaith older adult programs provides case management services to members of the milwaukee county family care program. Each participant is assigned a registered nurse and a case manager who assist in managing t-19 and t-18 benefits with a focus on meeting the participant's needs in a cost effective manner. In 2016, the program served an average of 427 family care members.

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 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.
  • 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. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.8%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 83.6%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $23.74 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 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: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.9%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.3; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.2; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.3%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -5.4% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.6% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -8% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.8% of revenue deployed · 83.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $5.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $107K · 17 people listed
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2012 to 2016
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 40/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 13/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 50/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.