Milwaukee Preservation Alliance

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
432026706
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Milwaukee, WI, USA
Phone
4142200530
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Historical Societies, Related Historical Activities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$981,218
Expenses
$334,369
Assets
$21,426,902
Liabilities
$20,136,144

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PETER ZANGHI (PRESIDENT)
  • JOSELIA MENDIOLEA (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • EMELIA K RUDD (EXECUTIVE DIR.): $75,231 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Milwaukee preservation alliance's mission is devoted to promoting stewardship and awareness of the historic, cultural, and economic value of milwaukee's built heritage. Mpa aims to strengthen milwaukee's neighborhoods by advocating for preservation in order to foster a strong and vibrant community.

What it reported doing in 2024

Save the soldiers home is a project to restore a national historic landmark. The soldiers home was established as a place for civil war soldiers to recuperate and transition back into society. Todays veterans continue to believe its regenerative powers should remain accessible to aging veterans and soldiers returning from iraq and afghanistan. The organization is part of an enhanced use lease (eul) agreement with the u.s. Department of veterans affairs (va), the alexander company and the housing authority of the city of milwaukee led a team chosen by the va to restore and rehabilitate six of the milwaukee va soldiers home historic district's buildings. We were excited to offer free guided walking tours of the soldiers home to show off the nationally recognized preservation success at old main. Our work on finding new uses for the still vacant and endangered soldiers home chapel, theater, and governor's mansion continued as well, as the va moves closer to an agreement or rfp for their rehabilitation.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 54% for direct work, and 46% for grants.
  • 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 available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 35
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 77
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 20.9%; rating input score 21
  • Program expense ratio: 55.5%; rating input score 55
  • Fundraising efficiency: $13.86 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 48; 48th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 65.9%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 64.08; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.94; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 22.5%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -7.8% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 34% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 20.9% of revenue deployed · 55.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $185K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $75K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 21/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 55/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 48/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.