United Way of St Clair County
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 381357996
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2016–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Port Huron, MI, USA
- Phone
- 8109858169
- Rating
- 79
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Federated Giving Programs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $813,882
- Expenses
- $995,230
- Assets
- $3,226,846
- Liabilities
- $14,764
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
28 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- BRENT GILLETTE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- MAT KING (PRESIDENT)
- MARC SIMONE (VICE - PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- BRENT GILLETTE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $87,626 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 saint clair county is to mobilize the community of st. Clair county, to raise the funds, and/or resources necessary to meet identified human service needs with the highest level of accountability and community involvement.
What it reported doing in 2024
Community impact services - united way of st. Clair county provides resources to allow for the development, & growth of local human service programs and projects to address identified and emerging community needs. To accomplish this, resources are solicited county-wide in an organized annual giving campaign and then allocated through a grant process to various human service organizations. These grants are monitored throughout the year to ensure accountability to the contributors and recipients of services. Both the annual giving campaign and the grants allocation and monitoring processes are done by volunteers with the support of a small staff. Programmatic funding is overseen by the citizens review committee and board of directors and administered by the executive director with staff assistance.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 89% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 76% 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 79
- Transparency & Controls: 90
- Accountability: 90
- Sustainability: 40
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 92.8%; rating input score 93
- Program expense ratio: 75.3%; rating input score 75
- Fundraising efficiency: $5.3 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
- 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: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -22.3%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.24; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 8.8%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -6.6% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -5.5% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -1.7% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 92.8% of revenue deployed · 75.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 26 of 26 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $749K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $88K · 28 people listed
- Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2016 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 14 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 13 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 19/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 41/100.