United Way of St Joseph County Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
351063368
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
South Bend, IN, USA
Phone
5742328201
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Federated Giving Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,370,321
Expenses
$2,661,057
Assets
$12,655,090
Liabilities
$815,401

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JAMES COX (PRESIDENT/CE)
  • MARK HERRIMAN (PRESIDENT/CE)

Highest reported compensation

  • JAMES COX (PRESIDENT/CE): $174,764 total reported compensation
  • MARK HERRIMAN (PRESIDENT/CE): $98,375 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 st. Joseph countys mission is to mobilize the community to collectively reduce poverty by moving people from a life of poverty to possibility. In order to surround the communitys most critical problem and fight it, we bring non-profits together. We know that change doesnt happen alone so we create change by bringing the right people to the table and offering a whole-community solution. Together, we are stronger.

What it reported doing in 2024

United way of st. Joseph county supports vulnerable individuals and families though community impact initiatives and strategic investments that strengthen health, education, economic mobility, and safety net services. In partnership with more than 25 nonprofit organizations, we expand access to critical resources that allow residents to live safer, healthier, and more stable lives. We secure, leverage, and direct funding to meet immediate basic needs and prevent families from falling into crisis, including early learning support, food access, and housing and utility assistance. A significant focus is placed on households below financial stability and alice (asset limited, income contrained, employed)individuals who are working but cannot afford basic needs. These efforts strengthen the local safety net and improve coordination across the community's support system.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 79% for direct work, 20% for grants, and 1% for affiliated organizations.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 54
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 72
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 53.4%; rating input score 53
  • Program expense ratio: 65.3%; rating input score 65
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.03 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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: 21%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.76; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.3%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.6% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.8% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 53.4% of revenue deployed · 65.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $175K · 15 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 17 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 17 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 53/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 22/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 29/100.