Public Representation Organization Faculty Senate (Profs)

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
391267500
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Madison, WI, USA
Phone
6083341612
Rating confidence
Limited

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$119,286
Expenses
$117,676
Assets
$107,946
Liabilities
$40

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHAEL BERNARD-DONALS (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • MICHAEL BERNARD-DONALS (PRESIDENT)
  • ELLEN ZWEIBEL (DIRECTOR (THROUGH 5/31/25))
  • LI CHIAO-PING (DIRECTOR/CHAIR (THROUGH 5/31/25))

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Profs is a voluntary, non-profit membership organization of uw-madison faculty. Members support profs through monthly payroll contributions equal to 1/10 of one-percent of the member's annual salary. Profs is not a union but does advocate on behalf uw-madison faculty before members of the Wisconsin legislature, the governor, the board of regents, members of congress and the general public.

What it reported doing in 2024

Formed in 1976 by the faculty senate, members support profs through monthly payroll deductions of one-tenth of one percent of a member's annual salary. Profs is not a union, but does advocate on behalf of uw-madison faculty before state legislators, the governor, the board of regents, members of congress and the public. Profs works on behalf of the faculty to protect and improve competitive compensation; faculty governance; protection of tenure; state support for the universitys operating budget; new buildings and maintenance; federal support for research; and retirement benefits.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 92% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.3%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.92; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 25.5%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.2% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 52/100.