Newcap Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 391050492
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Green Bay, WI, USA
- Phone
- 9208344621
- Rating
- 87
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $15,400,226
- Expenses
- $17,679,424
- Assets
- $14,683,712
- Liabilities
- $9,088,747
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
22 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- CHERYL DETRICK (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
- BRANDON CACEK (BOARD VICE PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- CHERYL DETRICK (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $261,084 total reported compensation
- DEB BARLAMENT (ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $177,593 total reported compensation
- ERIN EVOSEVICH (EVP OF PEOPLE SUCCESS SERVICE): $157,836 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Newcap, inc.'s mission is to move people from poverty to opportunities and economic security, while enhancing community development.
What it reported doing in 2024
Weatherization: the weatherization program is funded through the state of Wisconsin with funds from the us department of energy, public benefits, and wheap (Wisconsin home energy assistance program) versus of heat loss in low-income homes. People who are deemed high energy users by the state of Wisconsin, according to the amount of energy assistance the family receives, our first priority for weatherization. Clients are contacted by an energy auditor, who determines what work needs to be done to the home. After the audit, a crew will go to the home and actually perform the work prescribed by the audit under the careful supervision of a field coordinator. Such work may include insulating, working on attics and sidewalks, and replacing furnaces, water heaters, etc. In 2024, newcap served a total of 570 households.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 96% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 74% for direct work, and 26% for grants.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 85
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 20
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 89.3%; rating input score 89
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- 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: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -14.8%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.83; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.62; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 5.5%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 9.2% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 89.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $15.8M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $261K · 22 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.1M reported
- Consistency: 36 of 36 current checks pass
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 6 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 21/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 47/100.