United Way of Jackson County Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
930576632
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Medford, OR, USA
Phone
5417735339
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Federated Giving Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,041,160
Expenses
$2,265,975
Assets
$2,533,724
Liabilities
$36,752

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

Leadership & pay

36 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DEE ANNE EVERSON (CEO/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • BECKY SNYDER (PRESIDENT)
  • DR BRET CHAMPION (FIRST VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JESSICA MURREY (SECOND VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • DEE ANNE EVERSON (CEO/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $186,941 total reported compensation
  • ANNA BARNSLEY WERBLOW (CFO): $87,884 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 jackson county, inc. Is mobilizing caring to affect change.

What it reported doing in 2024

United way collects donor dollars to invest for impact in programs providing education, income, health and transportation programs serving two out of three people in jackson county. This fiscal year, united way funded 34 programs, including everything from early childhood programs to senior meals and much of life that falls in between. Donor dollars can be designated to a specific 501(c)(3) and united way honors donor choice. Fees are withheld for fundraising, administration and pledge loss. The allocations process is managed by volunteers who receive training, review applications, conduct site visits and score/evaluate each application and visit. Volunteers make recommendations to the united way board of directors who have final approval of all allocations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 84% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 85% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 78
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 92.7%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 80.1%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.65 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 88%; rating input score 88; 25th 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: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -11%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.12; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.1%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.4% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.6% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.1% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 92.7% of revenue deployed · 80.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 32 of 32 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $187K · 36 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 26 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 24 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 33/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 12/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 41/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.