Variety - the Children's Charity of Wisconsin Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
390977152
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Elm Grove, WI, USA
Phone
2627772090
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$602,169
Expenses
$598,923
Assets
$761,558
Liabilities
$148,209

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CATHERINE KENNEY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • MARK COLLINS (PRESIDENT)
  • LOIS TRONGARD (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • CATHERINE KENNEY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $82,810 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Enriching the lives of children with physical or developmental special needs and their families.

What it reported doing in 2024

Chatter matters communication camp gives children a voice by teaching families how to incorporate a speech generating device into their everyday activities. Through a partnership with uw-whitewater, graduate speech pathology students and other student volunteers and instructors host this overnight camp for children with special needs who use assistive communication devices and their immediate families. Through camp activities the child improves his or her device use to become a more competent communicator. Learning occurs through fun camp activities including arts and crafts, adaptive sports, games, music, stories campfire and more.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 62% for direct work, and 38% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 43
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 48%; rating input score 48
  • Program expense ratio: 47.2%; rating input score 47
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.98 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 9.4%; rating input score 9; 25th 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.5%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.27; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.19; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.8%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.3% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 48% of revenue deployed · 47.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $282K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $83K · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 31 of 33 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 48/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 9/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 47/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 9/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 50/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.