United Way of South Central Michigan

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
381359193
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Kalamazoo, MI, USA
Phone
2693432524
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Federated Giving Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$23,255,845
Expenses
$22,214,606
Assets
$32,958,772
Liabilities
$4,218,520

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

Leadership & pay

26 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHRISTIPHER SARGENT (PRESIDENT & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHRISTIPHER SARGENT (PRESIDENT & CEO): $227,927 total reported compensation
  • JENNIFER HSU-BISHOP (CHIEF EQUITY OFFICER): $163,416 total reported compensation
  • TERESA KMETZ (CHIEF RESOURCE DEV & MKTG OFFICER): $142,298 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

We bring together the people, ideas and resources to lead with our communities and create a flourishing, equitable life for everyone.

What it reported doing in 2024

Community impact & initiatives: uwscmi drives systems change and improvement through diverse community partnerships, assessment, advocacy, volunteerism, and collaboration to understand and address community needs collectively and strategically via program partnerships, uwscmi-driven initiatives and measurable outcomes. Examples of impact & initiatives in last fiscal year: program assistance center -- a Michigan energy assistance program providing households with direct energy assistance to pay heat and electric bills. Participants complete a needs assessment so they are connected with non-energy assistance services they need. 5,491 households received energy security/self-sufficiency programming or referrals. 3,990 households were served using state funding and funding from consumers energy.volunteer income tax assistance (vita) -- voluntary income tax assistance (vita) is one of uwscmi's core programs, providing free tax preparation services for households earning below $69,000. The vita program operates in five counties in Michigan: clinton, eaton, ingham, kalamazoo, and shiawassee. In the 2025 tax season, uwscmi's vita program served 5,400 households, who collectively received more than $7.4 million in federal, state, and home heating credit refunds including over $1.5 million in earned income tax credits (eitc). Additionally, through the free service participants collectively saved more than $1.6 million in costly tax preparation fees. Kalamazoo county continuum of care -- increased coordination and find solutions to the gaps, inequities, and challenges to reducing homelessness. In 2025, the coc administered federal funding and state funding to prevent and address homelessness; provided mini-grants to local non-profits serving the unhoused; and redesigned the rentable program to better support alice households in securing or retaining their housing.jobstar -- a resource for employers to help their employees overcome obstacles that may impede their ability to work. 2025 highlight: referrals provided: 1,652 referrals providing 877 employees across more than 20 business. Two highlights included implementing the first year of jobstar's multi-year workplan and wrapping up the federal earmark that allowed 10 nonprofits to participate in a year of programming. Capital area college access network (capcan) -- a community collaborative focused on increasing post-secondary attainment as an achievable reality for all residents by fostering high educational aspirations through the alignment of our institutions and resources. 2025 highlight: capcan staff launched the college ambassador program in which they trained 20 rising seniors to engage with their peers at school regarding the college process and help build a college going culture. Students served: 1,900.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 72% 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. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.1%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 86.6%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $21.53 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • 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: 48.1%; rating input score 48; 11th 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 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: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.5%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.48; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.4%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.1% of revenue deployed · 86.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 23 of 23 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $19.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $228K · 26 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $282K reported
  • Consistency: 38 of 39 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 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: 152 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 149 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 48/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 59/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 52/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.