Oshkosh Area Community Foundation Corporation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 392034571
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Oshkosh, WI, USA
- Phone
- 9204263993
- Rating
- 86
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Community Foundations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $15,045,838
- Expenses
- $12,294,392
- Assets
- $200,808,680
- Liabilities
- $64,886,162
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
21 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JODIE LARSEN (BOARD PRESIDENT)
- AMANDA HINRICHS (BOARD VICE-PRESIDENT)
- WILLIAM WYMAN (PRESIDENT & CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- WILLIAM WYMAN (PRESIDENT & CEO): $207,194 total reported compensation
- JENNIFER SHEAHAN (DIRECTOR OF FINANCE & ADMIN): $154,651 total reported compensation
- KARLENE GRABNER (DIRECTOR OF DONOR SERVICES): $114,322 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The mission of the oshkosh area community foundation corporation is to strengthen our communities. The organization accomplishes this through: leadership and funding to address current and emerging needs; collaboration and partnership with donors or others to ensure lasting impact; and outstanding stewardship and inspired philanthropy.
What it reported doing in 2024
The oshkosh area community foundation corporation is organized to receive and accept property to be administered exclusively for charitable purposes for the benefit of the people and the institutions serving our service area which includes winnebago county, waushara county, green lake county and ripon, Wisconsin.grantmaking and fund development is conducted: for assisting charitable and educational institutions; for promoting education and scientific research; for furnishing educational opportunities to individuals; for care of the sick, aged or helpless; to improve living conditions and to provide recreation for all classes; to enhance and promote economic development; to enhance and promote philanthropy; for other charitable purposes as will best make for the mental, moral and physical improvement of the inhabitants of the service area regardless of race, color or creed; to distribute property in accordance with the terms of gifts; to distribute property to qualified charitable organizations.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 97% of its reported program spending out as grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filed totals do not add up.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 84
- Transparency & Controls: 78
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 78
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 87.4%; rating input score 87
- Program expense ratio: 86.7%; rating input score 87
- Fundraising efficiency: $21.94 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 86%; rating input score 86; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th 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: 18.3%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 16.33; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.32; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 3.9%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 7.3% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 87.4% of revenue deployed · 86.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $10.7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $207K · 21 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 34 of 35 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 129 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 127 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 59/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 44/100.