Respite Care Association of Wisconsin Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
391857566
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Appleton, WI, USA
Phone
6082222033
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,235,392
Expenses
$1,275,361
Assets
$188,319
Liabilities
$77,790

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TRICIA LAZARE (PRESIDENT)
  • VICKY GUNDERSON (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • LISA SCHNEIDER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • LISA SCHNEIDER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $93,514 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To promote, support, and expand quality statewide respite care across the lifespan.

What it reported doing in 2025

Caregiver respite grant program (crgp): the caregiver respite grant program provides financial support for family caregivers for up to 5 days of respite care within 30 days of application approval. This grant allows approved applicants to hire the respite care provider of their choice for the care recipient. Cgrp applications approved - 150 family caregivers served that do not qualify for long term care programs cgrp total grant funds approved - $193,077 that is an increase of 27% family caregivers served over the prior year. Each year since inception, the demand has increased. Those served by this program reported an increase in the following 8 areas of health determinates of wellness after receiving respite: emotional 95%(emotional wellness is coping effectively with life and creating satisfying relationships) social 84%(social wellness is developing a sense of connection, belonging, and a well-developed support system.) financial 88% (financial wellness is satisfaction with current and future financial situations) spiritual 75%(spiritual wellness is expanding our sense of purpose and meaning in life.) occupational 55% ( 30%of recipients were unemployed) (occupational wellness is personal satisfaction and enrichment derived from one's work.) physical 84% (physical wellness is recognizing the need for physical activity, diet, sleep, and nutrition.) intellectual 75% (intellectual wellness is recognizing creative abilities and finding ways to expand knowledge and skills.) environmental 79% (environmental wellness is good health by occupying pleasant, stimulating environments that support well-being.)

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 100% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 60% for direct work, and 40% 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: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 20
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91.1%; rating input score 91
  • Program expense ratio: 88.2%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 95.8%; rating input score 96; 46th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -3.2%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.15; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.41; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.3%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16.5% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.6% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 91.1% of revenue deployed · 88.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 6 filed program accomplishments · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $94K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 9 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 22/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 8/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 15/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 45/100.