United Way of Central Washington

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
910639892
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Yakima, WA, USA
Phone
5092481557
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,187,828
Expenses
$1,229,885
Assets
$1,191,280
Liabilities
$350,328

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TRESSA MERCY (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • KAYLENE STILES (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • KAYLENE STILES (PRESIDENT): $114,735 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

United way of central Washington gathers together people, ideas and resources to strengthen communities and improve lives.

What it reported doing in 2024

United way and member agencies help people in yakima and kittitas counties improve their quality of life through education, increased financial stability, and improved health. In total, 67 programs, serving 150,000 people, were funded. United way distributes contributed funds through a volunteer-led community investment process. More than 50 volunteers evaluate funded programs' performance by conducting site visits, reviewing financial information, and examining program outcome measurements. In addition, united way conducts special projects and supports collaborations called community initiatives which address specific issues. Urrently, there are six initiatives 1) ongoing support of 2-1-1: a 3-digit information and referral phone number for connecting people to social services. 2) early learning collaboration: kindergarten readiness calendar distribution, and collaboration with the investing in children coalition. 3) yakima county homeless network: homeless assistance investment and project homeless connect. 4) yakima county asset building coalition. 5) new leaders yakima county: networking, community learning, and development for emerging leaders. 6) central Washington aces workgroup: raising awareness and mobilizing community to fight childhood trauma and increase youth resilience.

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 76% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.2%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 78.9%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.68 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 89.5%; rating input score 89; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 39.2%; rating input score 39; 27th 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; 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -3.5%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.97; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.29; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.3%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4.5% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3.7% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -3.8% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.2% of revenue deployed · 78.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $970K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $115K · 17 people listed
  • Consistency: 31 of 33 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 17 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 18 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.

  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 39/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 37/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 27/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 42/100.
  • 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.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 25/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 39/100.