United Way of Wexford-missaukee Counties

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237112549
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2023
Forms available
Form 990 2023
Location
Cadillac, MI, USA
Phone
2317753753
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$30,644
Expenses
$46,250
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRIAN KELSEY (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANDY ULRICH (EXECUTIVE DI): $35,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To meet critical human needs that will improve the quality of life and build a better community in wexford and missaukee counties. The united way of wexford-missaukee counties works to impact three targeted areas through community investment/annual allocations, community response grants, collaboratives and initiatives, volunteer development, and information and referral.

What it reported doing in 2023

The 2-1-1 program - 1. Connects every citizen with; a. Basic human needs b. Employment support c. Support for older citizens d. Support for people with disabilities e. Support for children, youth and families f. Physical and mental health services 2. Is an information resource during a community emergency, allowing 9-1-1 to focus on life threatening emergencies 3. Compiles data that breaks down and identifies critical needs in the community so that future resources may be directed more efficiently

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 75% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 90
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 16
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 86.3%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.6 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 20.8%; rating input score 21; 42nd 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -50.9%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 75.7%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -8% per year; rating input score 0; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -7.3% per year; rating input score 0; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -3% per year; rating input score 0; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 86.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $40K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $35K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 19 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2023
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 21/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 50/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 31/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.