Michigan Union Contractors Group Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
832852728
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2019
Location
Warren, MI, USA
Rating
48
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Labor Unions

Reported finances

Revenue
$234,340
Expenses
$78,684
Assets
$739,413
Liabilities
$20,001

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARK JOHNSTON (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • ROBERT ADCOCK (EXECUITIVE D)
  • MARK JOHNSTON (PRESIDENT)
  • MICHAEL MALLOURE (TREASURER)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The corporation has been formed as a Michigan nonprofit corporation as described in section 503(c)(6) of the internal revenue code of 1986, as amended, to promote the development of sound and stable labor management relations while fostering the establishment of a constructive joint process of communication and cooperation. Upon authorization by the board of directors, the corporation may lobby on behalf of its members before the appropriate legislature and represent its members in federal and state matters, including litigation, in any federal and state courts, agencies, and tribunals. Furthermore, the corporation may conduct or engage in all lawful activities in furtherance of the foregoing purposes, or incidental thereto. It is the mission of the association to negotiate labor agreements on behalf of all members who give the association a power of attorney in labor matters and to assist members in the administration of their labor agreements.

What it reported doing in 2024

It is the mission of the association to negotiate labor agreements on behalf of all members who give the association a power of attorney in labor matters and to assist members in the administration of their labor agreements.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 1
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 83
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0.6%; rating input score 1
  • Program expense ratio: 1.9%; rating input score 2
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • 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: 66.4%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 9.4; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13.7% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.2% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 26.3% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0.6% of revenue deployed · 1.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 1/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 38/100.