Mainers for Fair Wages

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
475379114
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Portland, ME, USA
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Labor Unions

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$892,668
Expenses
$890,224
Assets
$2,444
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

People named in this filing

  • LISA PROSIENSKI (MEMBER)
  • MARY ANNE TUROWSKI (MEMBER)
  • ROB WALKER (MEMBER)

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 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Mainers for fair wages' mission was to raise the the minimum wage in the state of Maine. Mfw was successful in this endeavor.

What it reported doing in 2016

Thanks to mainers for fair wages, question 4 (the minimum wage referendum) passed by 56% to 44% at the ballot in Maine in 2016. The new law will increase wages for 181,000 mainers, more than one third of Maine's workforce. Campaign achievements include: knocking on over 225,000 doors and speaking personally with over 180,000 Maine voters; recruiting more than 90 endorsing organizations; organizing hundreds of low-wage and tipped workers to give community presentations, share their stories in the press, knock on doors, and lead the campaign in their communities; involve over 600 small business owners to become public endorsers of the campaign, placing signs in their shop windows, writing letters to the editor and sharing their stories via social media videos; (for more see sch o)

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

SUPPORTED - 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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 99.7%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.3%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

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

Details

  • Where the money goes: 99.7% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $890K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 14 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.