United Way of Eastern La Salle County Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
362221411
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Ottawa, IL, USA
Phone
8154344003
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Federated Giving Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$332,639
Expenses
$367,910
Assets
$1,627,506
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ELLIE NAUMAN (President)
  • ANDREW BLACKBURN (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • SALLY HONIOTES (Executive Dir.): $62,727 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 easern lasalle county supports over 40 health & human service programs through its participation agencies. United way of eastern lasalle county coordinates its labor of love which is low-income home repair project; distributes school supplies to disadvantaged students through its school tools program; provides emergency financial rent and utility assistance through its community care program, targets parents, grandparetns, and caregivers of economically disadvantaged children with early learning materials and classes from birth through age five through its born learning program, provides "imagination library" books for any child born after january 1, 2008 residing in uwelc service area, in partnership with the IRS, united way of eastern lasalle county provides a vita (voluntary income tax assistance) stie; oversees the efsp grant for lasalle county; is the fiscal manager for the department of human service front door funds and assists many individuals with information and

What it reported doing in 2025

Distributes school supplies to disadvantaged students; provides emergency financial rent and utility assistance; provides classes from birth to age five through the born learning program; provides books to children through "imagination library provides a vita site; supports 2-1-1 program;

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The program-spending lines do not add up, so the filing cannot show reliably whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.7%; rating input score 84
  • Program expense ratio: 70.8%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.9 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 96.6%; rating input score 97; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 82.4%; rating input score 82; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: -10.6%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.42; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.3% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.2% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.7% of revenue deployed · 70.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 17 board members independent · 7 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $260K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $63K · 17 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 29 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2016 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 13/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 18/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • 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: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.