The Van Wert County Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
340907558
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Van Wert, OH, USA
Phone
4192381743
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$12,731,957
Expenses
$5,887,737
Assets
$85,540,758
Liabilities
$2,502,839

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SETH BAKER (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • SETH BAKER (CEO): $153,398 total reported compensation
  • SPENCER CREEKMORE (DIRECTOR OF PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT): $128,529 total reported compensation
  • MICHAEL HOLIDAY (CFO): $52,500 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 van wert county foundation is to transform quatilty of life by inspiring, fulfilling, and supporting philanthropy in an effort to create a well-resourced and thriving quality of life for our surrounding communities.

What it reported doing in 2024

The foundation supports the arts through the support of the van wert performing arts foundation which brings performing arts entertainment to van wert county at multiple venues in the area including powering the summer music series in fountain park. The foundation also promotes the arts for van wert and the surrounding communities in it's support of the wassenberg art center, a not for profit community art center.

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 75% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 57
  • Transparency & Controls: 73
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 88
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 54.6%; rating input score 55
  • Program expense ratio: 79.7%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 75%; rating input score 75; 15th 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: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 53.8%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 14.53; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.7%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 54.6% of revenue deployed · 79.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 6 filed program accomplishments · $4.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $153K · 18 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $108K reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 36 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 46 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 50 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: Mission deployment rate scored 55/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 45/100.