Society for Management Information Systems
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 260038975
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
- Location
- Milwaukee, WI, USA
- Phone
- 2628946076
- Rating
- 44
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $38,781
- Expenses
- $25,368
- Assets
- $38,779
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
11 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Ricky Franks (President)
- Pete Petersen (President-elect)
- Mary Acuna (Past President)
People named in this filing
- Ricky Franks (President)
- Pete Petersen (President-elect)
- Mary Acuna (Past President)
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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
SIM Wisconsin's primary exempt purpose is to provide professional development, leadership education, and peer networking opportunities for senior information technology leaders and academics across Wisconsin, while supporting community and educational initiatives related to information management and technology.
What it reported doing in 2025
Professional Networking & Leadership Development Programs SIM WI delivers facilitates networking and collaboration, leadership development sessions, and speaker events for senior information technology executives and academics. These programs focus on effective management of information technology, leadership skills, and emerging technology trends. Activities include meetings, special interest groups (SIGs), and presentations by industry executives and subject matter experts.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 69% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
- 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
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 71
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 34.6%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.53; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.