Michigan Council of Women in Technology Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
611465371
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Southfield, MI, USA
Phone
2482182578
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Development Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,778,972
Expenses
$2,262,796
Assets
$1,270,188
Liabilities
$211,452

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GRACE HANSEN (PRESIDENT)
  • JUDY ASHER (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ORLETTA CALDWELL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ORLETTA CALDWELL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $141,750 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Inspire and grow women in technology.

What it reported doing in 2024

K-12 school programs: k-12 programs are designed to capture the interest of girls entering their formative early years. These served approximately 965 girls across Michigan in 2024. Among these programs are virtual summer learning program (week-long online summer technology camp); get-it clubs (weekly technology clubs to build skills and confidence); girls solve it (a problem solving team competition in which girls program robots through several increasingly complex missions); a website design competition, challenging girls to create real websites using the coding skills they have developed; financial support of all-female robotics teams entering competitions; and girls rock it, one-day workshops that enable girl scouts to explore technology while earning badges.mcwt high school programs build on the interest of girls with programs to advance their interest and skill. Among these programs are the get-it connection summit (a single day event to expose them to tech career and study options, in conjunction with the university of Michigan); get-it clubs (weekly technology clubs to build skills and increase confidence); financial support of all female robotics teams entering competitions; virtual summer learning program (week-long online summer camp program); and a website design competition, challenging girls to create real websites using the coding skills they have developed. These programs served approximately 3,500 girls across Michigan in 2024.

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 82% 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.
  • 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 total spending goes to programs and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 51
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 21
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 61.7%; rating input score 62
  • Program expense ratio: 45.2%; rating input score 45
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.13 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 39th 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -27.2%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.56; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.17; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.3%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.2% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.3% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 61.7% of revenue deployed · 45.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $142K · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 34 of 35 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 45/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 13/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 26/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 34/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 49/100.