United Way of Siouxland Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
420680395
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Sioux City, IA, USA
Phone
7122553551
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Federated Giving Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,151,210
Expenses
$2,984,522
Assets
$7,276,217
Liabilities
$1,095,823

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

Leadership & pay

27 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • HEATHER HENNINGS (PRESIDENT/SECRETARY)

Highest reported compensation

  • HEATHER HENNINGS (PRESIDENT/SECRETARY): $121,455 total reported compensation
  • CHERYL SITZMANN (FINANCE MANAGER): $63,723 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of the united way of siouxland is to improve lives by uniting the caring power of our community.

What it reported doing in 2025

Education: education is a cornerstone for success in school, work, and life. And it benefits the whole community: high school graduates earn more and contribute more to their local economies. To ensure graduation rates we focus on root causes like making sure all children are ready to learn when entering kindergarten, making sure all students are reading at grade level as they enter 4th grade, as well as ensuring all children are socially and emotionally prepared to succeed in school and beyond.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 85% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 79.2%; rating input score 79
  • Program expense ratio: 80.2%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.7 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 89.5%; rating input score 89; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 92.5%; rating input score 92; 33rd 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: 5.3%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.44; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.15; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.2%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.9% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.2% per year; rating input score 100; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 79.2% of revenue deployed · 80.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 25 of 25 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $2.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $121K · 27 people listed
  • Consistency: 32 of 34 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 35 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 33 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 31/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 44/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • 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.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 49/100.