Waste Wise

Legal name: Minnesota Chamber Environmental Sustainability Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
411834630
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
St. Paul, MN, US
Phone
651.292.4650
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,888,804
Expenses
$2,484,563
Assets
$3,860,527
Liabilities
$285,659

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • VICTORIA STUTE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • ANNETTE KOJETIN (VICE PRESIDENT, CFO)
  • LAURA BORDELON (SR. VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JENNIFER MUNYER (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • BETH KADOUN (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • DOUG LOON (EX-OFFICIO TREASURER/SECRETARY): $609,763 total reported compensation
  • LAURA BORDELON (SR. VICE PRESIDENT): $329,167 total reported compensation
  • ANNETTE KOJETIN (VICE PRESIDENT, CFO): $217,186 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 help Minnesota businesses reduce waste, increase recycling, and save money through free consultations, utility bill analysis, funding assistance, and employee training.

What it reported doing in 2024

See schedule o for accomplishmentsthe Minnesota environmental sustainability foundation formally knowns as waste wise foundation has been operating since 1994. Our environmental sustainability consulting services continue to benefit Minnesota businesses and nonprofit communities throughout the state. Counties, other entites contract with Minnesota waste wise to help them advance their goals to reduce the commercial waste generated. Energy utilities contract with Minnesota waste wise to help them advance commercial and industrial energy reduction projects. We're pleased to report the following results for fiscal year 2024-2025:- 845 site visits conducted with busineses throughout Minnesota,- over $1.7m in grant dollars distributed including $603,000 in energy rebates- $728,000 estimated year 1 cost savings documented due to energy and waste project implementation -4.7m estimated year 1 annual kwh energy savings documented- 4,800 estimated year 1 annual dekatherms energy savings documented- 1.78m estimated year 1 pounds of waste diverted or reduced from waste stream- 380,000 units of plastic waste diverted from landfills- 6,700 metric tons of co2 emissiosn reduced

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 97% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 79% for direct work, and 21% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 53
  • Accountability: 93
  • Sustainability: 61
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69.2%; rating input score 69
  • Program expense ratio: 82.2%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 57.7%; rating input score 58; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 14%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.55; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.5%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13.4% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.7% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.1% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 69.2% of revenue deployed · 82.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 8 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $610K · 16 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 8 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 58/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 44/100.