Madison Northside Planning Council Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
391759164
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Madison, WI, USA
Phone
6082301221
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Coalitions

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,030,555
Expenses
$1,199,048
Assets
$1,605,961
Liabilities
$1,460,494

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JUSTIN MARKOFSKI (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHRIS BROCKEL (DIRECTOR OF FOOD SYSTEMS): $80,000 total reported compensation
  • JUSTIN MARKOFSKI (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $76,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To improve the quality of life and foster equity on the northside through community organizing and economic development.

What it reported doing in 2024

The feed kitchens is a 5,400 square foot commercial kitchen, food business incubator and local food manufacturing facility. In 2024, feed supported 75 commercial businesses and 15 nonprofit/community groups. 70% of the commercial businesses at feed are owned by minority entrepreneurs and another 50% owned by women entrepreneurs. These businesses generated nearly $2.3 million revenue and created 43 full-time and 39 part-time jobs. Feed also acts as a hub for local food processing, vocational training, food recovery work by healthy food for all, nonprofit and community use, and as an event venue for residents and corporations. In addition to the state-of-the-art facilities in the building, feed offers valuable business development services, coaching and relationship development throughout the local food system.in 2024 feed kitchens had multiple businesses graduate from our facility/services and move to their own production spaces and as we move into our eleventh year of operation, graduations are becoming more frequent. Our signature events for 2024 were taste the future, a free community event with 400 attendees featuring 10 feed kitchens entrepreneurs each offering 2 small plate tastings of their cuisine and our successful holiday bazaar, a market featuring bakers and packaged goods entrepreneurs, with a dozen vendors and about 250 attendees.

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.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 91
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 68
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 83.6%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $25.27 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 22
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -16.3%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.34; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.91; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.3% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 83.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $80K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • 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.

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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 7 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 11/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.