United Way of Marquette County

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
381358204
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Marquette, MI, USA
Phone
9062268171
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$505,278
Expenses
$497,866
Assets
$689,310
Liabilities
$407,061

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANDREW RICKAUER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • GREG NYEN (PRESIDENT)
  • GENEVIEVE MORGAN (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANDREW RICKAUER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $79,255 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Focusing community resources to meet community needs the United Way of Marquette County works to advance the common good by connecting people with health and human care issues they are concerned about and to provide the oversight the community expects in creating lasting change in the lives in individuals and families.

What it reported doing in 2024

Fund Distribution - Through the community investment process, community volunteers, with the support of the United Way staff, perform an in-depth review of various local 501c3 non-profit agencies program proposals and meet with agency representatives to determine distribution of funds from the annual pledge drive. Agencies programs must address identified community needs, track program outcomes and achieve positive results in the following impact areas basic needs emergency food, clothing, shelter, youth programs, medical assisant/health care programs, and elderly citizens adults with disabilities. Approximately 22 programs were funded annually. United Way of Marquette County provides donors with a choice in its annual pledge drive. Contributions can be designated to a specific 501c3 health and human service organization serving Marquette County or contributions can be undesignated and allocated to agencies via the review process. United Way cannot guarantee how undesignated funds will be used.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 86% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 66% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 89
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 72.6%; rating input score 73
  • Program expense ratio: 72.5%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.88 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 96.4%; rating input score 96; 43rd 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 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: 1.5%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.38; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.59; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.9%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.6% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.1% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.6% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 72.6% of revenue deployed · 72.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $361K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $79K · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding 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: 26 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 25 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 34/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 40/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 13/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.