Local 12 USWGoodyear Institute For Career Develop

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
260724269
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022, Form 990-EZ 2010
Location
Rainbow City, AL, USA
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Job Training

Reported finances

Revenue
$126,933
Expenses
$80,903
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jack Mitchell (President)

People named in this filing

  • John Garmon (Member)
  • Jack Mitchell (President)
  • Jackie Crowe (Coordinator)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Providing resources and support services for the education, training, and personal development of the members of Local 12 USW/Goodyear including upgrading their basic skills and educational levels.

What it reported doing in 2022

Courses were offered with emphasis on teaching a variety of skills to union members. Classes were taught by skilled professional educators who were contracted by the local ICD coordinator. Students attended classes at educational institutions or participated in custom classes that taught basic computer operation skills, intermedidate and advanced computer technology, digital photography, adobe photoshop, real estate classes, art, CPR, and air conditioning and refrigeration components. In addition, participants are provided assistance with college tuition and books. Financial assistance is limited to $2,000 per participant for customized courses and $2,500 per participant for tuition assistance. Customized classes attended included HVAC technician training, CDL training, and welding classes. Book cost assistance was provided to 17 participants and tuition cost assistance was provided to 58 participants. Customized classes were provided to 16 participants.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 48% for direct work, and 52% for grants.

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: 63
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 58.8%; rating input score 59
  • Program expense ratio: 92.2%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 36.3%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -7.6% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.9% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -5.4% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 58.8% of revenue deployed · 92.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $75K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 13 of 14 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2011 to 2022
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 59/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.