United Community Action Network
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 930587136
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Roseburg, OR, USA
- Phone
- (800) 301-8226
- Rating
- 80
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Human Service Organizations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $36,131,079
- Expenses
- $35,741,196
- Assets
- $24,737,975
- Liabilities
- $9,594,311
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
12 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- SHAUN PRITCHARD (CEO)
- JORDAN JUNGWIRTH (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- JORDAN JUNGWIRTH (CEO): $167,933 total reported compensation
- ANDREA JOHNSON (CHIEF HR OFFICER): $151,271 total reported compensation
- RACHEL ANGLIN (CFO): $151,014 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Creating solutions to poverty, improving lives in our community.
What it reported doing in 2024
Weatherizationaccounts for revenues and expenditures related to providing low-income households home measures, retrofits, and upgrades designed to reduce home utility usage and costs. Some funds may also be used to address the health and safety needs of low-income households. Households also may receive education supporting reduced use of energy.property managementaccounts for revenues and expenditures for the purpose of providing low-income housing to individuals and families in need. Ucan operates approximately 91 units in 18 properties throughout douglas county. The housing consists of transitional housing and permanent housing. Transitional housing focuses on moving families to stabilization. Permanent housing allows individuals and families to stay for as long as they need, given certain income requirements, with the objective of helping them to become self-sufficient. All residents are charged a below market rental rate and some are required to participate in case management programming.volunteer servicesunited communities americorps - accounts for revenues and expenditures related toproviding americorps members to coos, curry, douglas, jackson and josephinecounties. Americorps is a national community service program that places members athost sites, including nonprofits, government agencies, and schools. Americorpsprovides opportunities for americans to give back in an intensive way to theircommunities and country by addressing critical needs in education, health, andeconomic opportunity. Members volunteer for up to one year and receive a stipend, health care benefits, childcare assistance, and may earn an education award to payoff student loans or finance secondary schooling. Funding is provided by communityagencies receiving services from americorps members and from the corporation fornational community service through Oregon's higher education coordinating commission.americorps seniors - accounts for revenues and expenditures related to providingretired seniors volunteer program (rsvp) volunteers in douglas and josephinecounties. Rsvp is one of america's largest volunteer network for people age 55+.members serve to meet critical needs in many areas including assistance with taxpreparation, providing medicare education and enrollment support, and preventingfraud and scams. Rsvp volunteers choose how, where, and how often they want toserve, while connecting and supporting other community members.transportationmedicaid transportation programaccounts for transportation services provided toeligible Oregon health plan and eligible medicaid clients traveling to authorizedmedical services in coos, douglas and josephine counties. This service is providedin conjunction with a number of different brokerage firms and is provided to clientswho have no other means to get to their medical services.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 85% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 69% for direct work, and 31% for grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 79
- Transparency & Controls: 79
- Accountability: 91
- Sustainability: 39
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 88.9%; rating input score 89
- Program expense ratio: 89.8%; rating input score 90
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 1.1%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.69; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.39; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 1.6%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 13 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 7 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 88.9% of revenue deployed · 89.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $32.1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $168K · 12 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $914K reported
- Consistency: 34 of 35 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
- 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.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 24/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 38/100.