United Way of Collier and the Keys Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
591026096
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Naples, FL, USA
Phone
2392617112
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Federated Giving Programs

Reported finances

Revenue
$10,449,939
Expenses
$2,946,346
Assets
$14,685,822
Liabilities
$601,956

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TIFFANI MENSCH (PRESIDENT CE)

Highest reported compensation

  • TIFFANI MENSCH (PRESIDENT CE): $219,001 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

United way of collier and the keys (uwck) invests in local nonprofit partners and internal programs that strengthen financial stability, build healthy communities, expand youth opportunities, and foster community resilience. As a trusted partner to businesses, donors, nonprofits, and government agencies, we leverage innovation and collaboration to expand access to vital services and deliver enhanced support in times of crisis. The vision of united way of collier and the keys (uwck) is that all individuals and families living and working in collier county and the Florida keys have access to the resources and opportunities they need to succeed and thrive. Uwck's mission is to respond to community issues by uniting people and resources to create lasting change for a brighter future.

What it reported doing in 2025

Uwck invests in programs at local nonprofit agencies and internal programs that promote financial stability, health, and education. An active partner of businesses, individual donors, nonprofit agencies, and governments, we innovate and leverage our relationships to continually improve services and access to services for those in need, and provide enhanced aid in times of crisis.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 66% for direct work, 32% for grants, and 2% for affiliated organizations.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 47
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 82
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 23.9%; rating input score 24
  • Program expense ratio: 80.2%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $28.59 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • 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: 98%; rating input score 98; 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 71.8%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.98; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.4%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.4% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 23.9% of revenue deployed · 80.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $219K · 17 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 37 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 34 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 24/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 39/100.