United Food and Commercial Workers Ufcw Local 880 Scholarship Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
341727490
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2019
Location
Broadview Hts, OH, USA
Phone
2162415930
Rating
53
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards

Reported finances

Revenue
$86,814
Expenses
$19,370
Assets
$706,231
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • CARL IVKA (TRUSTEE): $487,052 total reported compensation
  • SAMUEL MILES ANDERSON (TRUSTEE): $307,408 total reported compensation
  • CARL GREEN (TRUSTEE): $268,321 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 united food and commercial workers union local 880 scholarship fund annually awards undergraduate college scholarships typically in the amount of $4,000 per recipient and payable in installments of $1,000 each. The trustees are authorized to permit distribution of the $2,000 award in different installments if the circumstances warrant. The scholarship fund trustees may also increase or decrease the number of scholarship grants, or the dollar amount of those grants, as they deem appropriate. These scholarships are gifts, not loans.availability of the scholarship grants is publicized in the union newspaper and on the union's website.

What it reported doing in 2024

Scholarships granted to 7 individuals paid in installments of $1,000: selection terms and conditions: scholarship recipients are chosen in two ways: (1) the vast majority of scholarships are awarded to applicants who have applied for a scholarship from the international union's scholarship program. Each such applicant must comply with the rules and regulations established by the international union scholarship program. They must send their completed applications directly to the international union's scholarship program for processing. Once the international union's scholarship committee has evaluated all applications received, it sends the ranked results (and supporting materials) for those applicants within local 880's jurisdiction to the local 880 scholarship fund trustees. These materials and rankings from the international are reviewed by the local 880 scholarship fund trustees, and if the trustees agree with the rankings, then scholarships are awarded to the top three applicants from the cleveland area, two applicants from the akron-canton area, and one applicant from the youngstown area. If the trustees do not agree with the rankings from international, the trustees may revise the rankings and those applicants who will be selected to receive scholarships. Furthermore and if there are insufficient applicants in a geographical area (cleveland, akron-canton or youngstown), then a selection will be made from the other two areas based upon the analysis and evaluation of the trustees. (2) on occasion, the scholarship fund trustees will award scholarships to deserving applicants who were not the highest ranked by the international and to deserving applicants who applied solely to local 880. In these cases need and commitment to the union movement are the primary considerations for an award rather than scholastics.notification and follow up terms and conditions: the scholarship fund trustees notify the successful applicants of their selection. Each applicant must complete and sign a scholarship acceptance agreement and a verification of enrollment form. The scholarship fund trustees annually verify continued enrollment and scholastic achievement. A verification of enrollment form signed by a college or university official must be received by the scholarship fund to prove the grantee remains enrolled. The trustees also check the union's membership database to confirm the continued membership status of the recipient or a parent.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 76% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 50
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 12
  • Sustainability: 79
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 32.3%; rating input score 32
  • Program expense ratio: 98.2%; rating input score 98
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: Limited
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 77.7%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 36.46; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 462.5%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.1% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 32.3% of revenue deployed · 98.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 2 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $19K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $487K · 3 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 16 of 17 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 32/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.