Upper Shore Workforce Investment Board Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521322287
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Wye Mills, MD, USA
Phone
4108275816
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,929,350
Expenses
$1,930,943
Assets
$289,447
Liabilities
$285,466

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

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SCOTT WARNER (PRESIDENT)
  • WILLIAM CHRISTOPHER (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ELLEN LAFRANKIE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • DANIEL SCHNECKENBURGER (FORMER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ELLEN LAFRANKIE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $97,609 total reported compensation
  • DANIEL SCHNECKENBURGER (FORMER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $58,140 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to prepare people for training and prepare people for work. We are committed to assisting employers with occupational training that addresses jobs in demand.

What it reported doing in 2024

The upper shore workforce investment board provides career and training services to economically disadvantaged adults, dislocated workers and economically disadvantaged youth participants. The upper shore workforce investment board met or exceeded all united states department of labor performance standards related to the percentage of participants who got a job, kept a job, earned a credential and earned a paycheck.the upper shore workforce investment board continued the implementation of the workforce innovation and opportunity act in the Maryland counties - caroline, dorchester, kent, queen anne's and talbot.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 100% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 60% for direct work, and 40% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 24
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89.4%; rating input score 89
  • Program expense ratio: 89.3%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 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: -0.1%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.15; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.99; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.1%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.9% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 89.4% of revenue deployed · 89.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 19 of 19 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $98K · 21 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $817K reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 35/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 6/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 43/100.