United Way of the Lakeshore

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
381426895
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Muskegon, MI, USA
Phone
2317223134
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Federated Giving Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,396,334
Expenses
$2,272,351
Assets
$3,271,227
Liabilities
$252,739

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

29 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LISA TYLER (PRESIDENT &)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHRISTINE ROBERE (PAST PRESI): $69,652 total reported compensation
  • LISA TYLER (PRESIDENT &): $51,122 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to inspire change and build thriving communities.

What it reported doing in 2025

Agency relations, capacity building and investments- convening and engaging the community to assess the needs, building capacity to deliver human care solutions, program evaluation and investing donor dollars in local human services that maximize their use on priority needs. Community impact and planning- includes time spent in meetings to discuss community problems, solutions, funding opportunities, collaboration with other agencies and organizations, needs assessments, data collection, and in general, work that is done to advance the general common good.

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 48% for direct work, and 52% for 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 revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 81.7%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 82.7%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.93 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 25th 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: 95.8%; rating input score 96; 36th 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: 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: 5.2%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.44; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.3%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.3% per year; rating input score 100; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.3% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 81.7% of revenue deployed · 82.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 27 of 27 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $70K · 29 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 36 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 38 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 36 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 28/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 47/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 55/100.