International Union Uaw Local 696

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
310446346
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2010
Forms available
Form 990 2010
Location
Dayton, OH, USA
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Labor Unions

Reported finances

Revenue
$224,418
Expenses
$221,774
Assets
$797,737
Liabilities
$21,895

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2010. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2010. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Promote social and economic justice through collective bargaining meetings education communication organizing new bargaining units community action administration of the organization maintenance of its property and assets delivery of benefits to represented members fraternal and

What it reported doing in 2010

Collective bargaining representation to 4300 members

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 99% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 64
  • Accountability: 14
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 59th 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.2%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.6; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.6%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 0 of 12 board members independent · 3 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $222K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $12K · 13 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 48/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 27/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.