United Way of Beaver County

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
251086798
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Beaver, PA, USA
Phone
7247743210
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Federated Giving Programs

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,034,156
Expenses
$943,551
Assets
$1,427,709
Liabilities
$98,864

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

Leadership & pay

24 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARY LOU HARJU (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • TONI SADECKY (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARY LOU HARJU (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $106,148 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 united way of beaver county is to mobilize the caring power of the community, in turn fostering improvement in people's lives.

What it reported doing in 2024

The organization mobilizes the community financial support for its memberagencies, who serve the general population in a variety of ways with the intention of improving lives. In addition to its campaign effors, the allocation and agency relations program plays a crucial role in its mission. The program involves vetting, monitoring, and developing relationships with nonprofit organizations to idetnify and approve member agencies, which in turn receives support from united way through funding and collaboration to address community needs. United way also started a new fundraising campaign for asset limited income contrained employed (alice) households. In 2024, the united way gave over $400,000 in grants and over $110,000 in alice mini-grants.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 92% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 54
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 80%; rating input score 80
  • Program expense ratio: 86.8%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $17.63 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 91.2%; rating input score 91; 39th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8.8%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.51; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.2%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 80% of revenue deployed · 86.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 23 of 23 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $206K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $106K · 24 people listed
  • Consistency: 32 of 34 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 29 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 28 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 55/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 59/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 56/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.