United Way of Northern Ozaukee Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237084522
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Port Washington, WI, USA
Phone
2486137855
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$425,288
Expenses
$455,437
Assets
$552,724
Liabilities
$299,130

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CRAIG MODAHL (PRESIDENT)
  • BARBARA BATES-NELSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • BARBARA BATES-NELSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $30,773 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 northern ozaukee is to make a positive difference for our communities.

What it reported doing in 2024

United way of northern ozaukee is proud to support 12 ozaukee county partner agencies that provide critical programming in our three impact areas: health, education and financial stability. This year over 15,000 ozaukee county residents benefitted from united way funded programs. 196 inviduals received help with rent assistance to avoid eviction. Over 12,900 individuals received meals from who were receiving food insecurities. This was an increase 41%. 73 children who were impacted by violence, abuse or neglect received advocacy and support from our partner agency.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 83% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91.5%; rating input score 91
  • Program expense ratio: 85.4%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $14.11 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 96.1%; rating input score 96; 56th 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -7.1%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.21; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.54; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.8%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.1% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 91.5% of revenue deployed · 85.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $389K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $31K · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 9 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 48/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 46/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 10/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.