United Way of Southwest Minnesota
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 416023143
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Marshall, MN, USA
- Phone
- 5079292273
- Rating
- 82
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Federated Giving Programs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $409,767
- Expenses
- $518,506
- Assets
- $787,438
- Liabilities
- $224,856
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
18 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MEG LOUWAGIE (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- MEG LOUWAGIE (CEO): $64,614 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 united way of southwest Minnesota invests donations into our communities primarily through community impact grants. We focus on four key areas: youth opportunity, healthy communities, financial security, and community resilience. Programs that receive funding are carefully selected based on their significant impact on the lives of residents in lincoln, lyon, murray, yellow medicine, and parts of cottonwood, lac qui parle, nobles, and redwood counties in Minnesota.
What it reported doing in 2024
Community impact: united way of southwest Minnesota is a Minnesota nonprofit organization. It is a local autonomous 501(c)(3) organization working to create lasting changes in people's lives and the communities in lincoln, lyon, murray, yellow medicine and portions of cottonwood, lac qui parle, nobles and redwood counties of Minnesota. We accomplish this by partnering with non-profit agencies, schools or local units of government that serve people in this area of the state of Minnesota and by targeting grants for specific programs that produce outcomes within the areas of yourth opportunity, healthy communities, financial stability, and community resilience. Annually, the united way of southwest Minnesota board of directors determines the overall funding level for community impact grants based upon resources gathered during the preceding fund-raising campaign. Qualifying organizations that serve local people are invited to prepare grant proposals that address strategies within the above listed priority areas. Grant applications undergo review through an organized citizen review process (outlined in part iv, schedule i, part 1, line 2). Recommendations are then presented to the united way of southwest Minnesota's board of directors for final review and approval. Approved grants become available july 1 of each year. All community impact grants are paid out in quarterly installments.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 78% of its reported program spending out as grants.
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: 84
- Transparency & Controls: 88
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 26
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 99%; rating input score 99
- Program expense ratio: 78.2%; rating input score 78
- Fundraising efficiency: $5.88 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 90.3%; rating input score 90; 52nd 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: -26.5%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.52; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.29; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 12.5%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -1.9% per year; rating input score 0; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -0.8% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 99% of revenue deployed · 78.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $406K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $65K · 18 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: 16 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 12 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 26/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 11/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 16/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 27/100.