Mountain West Credit Union Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
742232424
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022
Location
Seatac, WA, USA
Phone
8009959064
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Credit Unions

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$355,006
Expenses
$371,609
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SCOTT EARL (PRESIDENT)
  • DAN SANTANGELO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • SCOTT EARL (PRESIDENT): $1,077,344 total reported compensation
  • DAN SANTANGELO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $142,190 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The organization is operated exclusively for charitable, scientific, and educational purposes. The foundation's mission is to promote leadership and support long-term success of credit unions in their communities.

What it reported doing in 2022

Credit union development - including educational scholarships for undergraduate, graduate, and other professional development programs - and including grants funded from community investment fund (cif) through the national credit union foundation - projects to improve the financial well being of consumers, communities and demonstrate the "credit union difference".

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 80% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 15
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 98.3%; rating input score 98
  • Program expense ratio: 93.5%; rating input score 94
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 24th 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: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 50th 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: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -4.7%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 157.5%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.3% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 98.3% of revenue deployed · 93.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $347K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.1M · 14 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2010 to 2022
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 32/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.