Perinatal Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
391510620
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Milwaukee, WI, USA
Phone
6082855858
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$273,747
Expenses
$253,964
Assets
$3,916,421
Liabilities
$9,199

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • AMANDA LEIPOLD JD MPH (PRESIDENT)
  • CLAIRE LEMPKE GRUPE (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MICHELLE STRINGER (WAPC PAST PRESIDENT)
  • TERESA JOHNSON (WAPC PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • EILEEN ZEIGER (DIRECTOR): $144,016 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 perinatal foundation is to secure & provide resources to improve the health of babies, mothers & families from preconception to early childhood. The foundation pursues this mission by identifying current & emerging needs across (see schedule o) the spectrum of perinatal health concerns & working collaboratively with wapc to promote & implement effective perinatal practices; securing & managing the resources that make the foundation's work possible & awarding grants in support of research, education & model projects. The foundation was established in 1985.

What it reported doing in 2024

The perinatal foundation is a supporting organization of wapc. An unrestricted educational grant of $139,977 was distributed during 2024. The grant enabled wapc to provide cutting edge educational support to perinatal professionals, participate and add to statewide collaborations, and continue work on the Wisconsin perinatal quality collaborative. In addition, there was a $39,708 discretionary grant to wapc.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 87% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 82.6%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.3%; rating input score 98; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • 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: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 7.2%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 15.42; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: Limited

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.9% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.8% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 82.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $210K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $144K · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 55/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 54/100.