United Way of Southwest Oklahoma
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 736053875
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Lawton, OK, USA
- Phone
- 5803550218
- Rating
- 77
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Federated Giving Programs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,336,219
- Expenses
- $1,216,810
- Assets
- $2,436,834
- Liabilities
- $162,841
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
26 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MARK WOOMMAVOVAH (PRESIDENT &)
Highest reported compensation
- MARK WOOMMAVOVAH (PRESIDENT &): $75,000 total reported compensation
- CAROL HERRICK (INTERIM PRES): $75,000 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
United way of southwest Oklahoma mobilizes the communities we serve in ways no single agency, individual, or government can to enhance the ability of people to care. United way of southwest Oklahoma capitalizes on the abilities of hundreds of volunteers to help determine critical community needs, assess the value of programs seeking funding and determine and leverage adequate funding for those programs. We work to increase awareness and engage volunteers to raise funds to support services that address those needs. We collaborate with many organizations on community issues. We strive to build the skills of volunteers who serve as non- profit board members.
What it reported doing in 2024
Agency allocation/fund distribution-funds from the fye 2025 campaign were distributed to 14 different 501(c)3 non-profit health and human services providers and other organizations designated by the donors. Programs funded through our needs assessment and volunteer review process must meet stringent guidelines for outcomes, financial responsibility and volunteer board involvement. Community volunteers serve as the review panel for this process.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 77% 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 75
- Transparency & Controls: 90
- Accountability: 86
- Sustainability: 56
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 79.4%; rating input score 79
- Program expense ratio: 81.6%; rating input score 82
- Fundraising efficiency: $9.69 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 37; 37th 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: 99.1%; rating input score 99; 48th 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: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- 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: 8.9%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 12.3%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -1.9% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -2.1% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -1.7% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 79.4% of revenue deployed · 81.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 24 of 24 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $993K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $75K · 26 people listed
- Consistency: 37 of 38 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 15 filed money-flow records
- 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 37/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 59/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 30/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.