Lakeshore Community Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
270978059
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2010, Form 990-N 2009
Location
Manitowoc, WI, USA
Phone
9206825222
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Foundations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$26,474,338
Expenses
$3,657,101
Assets
$155,148,586
Liabilities
$47,880,155

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JAMES VOPAT (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • RACHEL WIEGERT (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • RACHEL WIEGERT (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $199,734 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Mission statement: to gather, grow, and give endowed charitable financial resources to build stronger, more vibrant communities now and into the future.value statement: we are committed to managing our clients' philanthropic endowments in perpetuity, with a focus on minimizing costs and fees to maximize their impact on the grantees they care about most. Our priority remains solely on supporting our clients' charitable goals, thereby strengthening our communities throughout the lakeshore area and beyond.

What it reported doing in 2025

Lakeshore community foundation, inc. Is a tax exempt public charity organized to promote and manage endowment funds primarily for the benefit of sheboygan and manitowoc counties. The foundation receives, administers, and distributes gifts from individuals and organizations for the long term benefit of the counties it serves. During 2025, the foundation added six new funds to its portfolio for a total of 111 funds with an aggregate market value of $150.5 million at year end. Average fund size was $1.4 million. During 2025, growth in gifts to new and existing funds was $21.7 million. The foundation issued 349 grants during 2025 totaling $4.3 million. Since the first fund was established in may 2011, the foundation has distributed $29.2 million in grants.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 90% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 92% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 53
  • Transparency & Controls: 73
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 86
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 22.7%; rating input score 23
  • Program expense ratio: 89.5%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $333.96 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • 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: 93%; rating input score 93; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 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: 86.2%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 42.42; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.31; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.5%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14.7% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.4% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 22.7% of revenue deployed · 89.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $200K · 10 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $110K reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 34 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 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: 77 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 74 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 23/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 40/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 54/100.