Uw-madison Supporting Organization Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
391947636
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020, Form 990-EZ 2018
Location
Madison, WI, USA
Phone
6082634545
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$200,000
Expenses
$204,500
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SCOTT T MCKINNEY (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MICHAEL M KNETTER (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MICHAEL M KNETTER (PRESIDENT): $843,895 total reported compensation
  • REBECCA M BLANK (DIRECTOR): $596,054 total reported compensation
  • ALISA A ROBERTSON (ASSISTANT TREASURER): $388,055 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Uw-madison supporting organization, inc. Is organized and shall be operated exclusively for charitable, scientific and educational purposes and for the beneift of, to perform the functions of, or to carry out the purposes of the university of Wisconsin-madison, and for programs and activities conducted by the university of Wisconsin foundation which supports the functions and purposes of the university of Wisconsin-madison; to engage in activities relating to the aforementioned purposes; and to invest in, receive, hold, use and dispose of all property, real or personal, as may be necessary or desirable to carry into effect the aforementioned purposes.

What it reported doing in 2020

Uw-madison supporting organization, inc. Is organized and shall be operated exclusively for charitable, scientific and educational purposes and for the benefit of, to perform the functions of, or to carry out the purposes of the university of Wisconsin-madison, and for programs and activities conducted by the university of Wisconsin foundation which supports the functions and purposes of the university of Wisconsin-madison; to engage in activities relating to the aforementioned purposes; and to invest in, receive, hold, use and dispose of all property, real or personal, as may be necessary or desirable to carry into effect the aforementioned purposes.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% 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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 23
  • Sustainability: 15
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2.2%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 125.1%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 22.3% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 38.2% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -37.1% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $204K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $844K · 4 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 12 of 12 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2012 to 2020
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 3 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 30/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.