United Auto Aerospace And

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237170577
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2019
Forms available
Form 990 2019
Location
West Hartford, CT, USA
Phone
8609531346
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$413,264
Expenses
$367,479
Assets
$979,490
Liabilities
$2,085

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • MICHAEL LANGSTON (PLAN ADMINIS): $99,172 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To subsidize dental costs for participating members of uaw local 376.

What it reported doing in 2019

Dental benefits paid on behalf of plan members.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 93% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 44% for direct work, and 56% for member benefits.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 61
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90.1%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 11.1%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.67; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.5%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4.1% per year; rating input score 0; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.8% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.1% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 90.1% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $367K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $99K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2011 to 2019
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.