Jonah Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
061835411
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-N 2010
Location
Eau Claire, WI, USA
Phone
7153796817
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Federated Giving Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$248,344
Expenses
$192,032
Assets
$184,729
Liabilities
$15,174

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

Leadership & pay

27 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JEN BARNET (PRESIDENT)
  • ANDY THOMPSON (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MIKE STEUER (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • LYNN BUSKE (LEAD ORGANIZER): $46,083 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Jonah (joining our neighbors, advancing hope) is a grassroots organization of faith communities and others that seeks to bring people together and empower them to build community, take part in decisions that most affect their lives, and build a healthier and fairer community.

What it reported doing in 2024

Our affordable housing task force has been supporting community member through their tenant landlord resource center, which is almost ready to be on its own as an entity, and have been advocating for the needs of low income renters and individuals experiencing homelessness in every corner of the community.our mental health task force provided dozens of 30-minute basic trainings on how people can support each other in their mental health, and worked to dispute the green bandana program further in the chippewa valley and into schools - creating a reduction in stigma against mental health, normalizing talking about mental health challenges, and networks of peers supporting each other.the environmental task force form sub-committees to deepen thier impact on plastics reduction, increasing composting, and saving biodiversity - each committee implementing several successful initiatives. They also continue to nurture collaboration between eco-groups in the area, particularly through their annual earth week open house and partnering with ec city sustainability, beaver creek and ec water alliance.our other task forces continue to make strides in improving the lives of children living in poverty, supporting successful recovery and reentry for those impacted by the criminal legal system, creating a welcoming community for refugees and immigrants in our midst, improving public transportation access, reaching out to rural residents, and training individuals in leadership.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 66% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 91% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 61
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 56.6%; rating input score 57
  • Program expense ratio: 72.5%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: $13.72 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 22.7%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.96; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 24%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 16.7% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 27% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 56.6% of revenue deployed · 72.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 26 of 26 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $139K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $46K · 27 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 57/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 48/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 28/100.