Wakeman Memorial Association Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 060662198
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Bridgeport, CT, USA
- Phone
- 2039083381
- Rating
- 78
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Youth Centers, Clubs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $5,520,366
- Expenses
- $6,480,709
- Assets
- $23,011,123
- Liabilities
- $2,151,825
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
28 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- SABRINA E SMELTZ (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
Highest reported compensation
- SABRINA E SMELTZ (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $216,454 total reported compensation
- LISA BYRNE (CFO): $140,981 total reported compensation
- TIMOTHY CEPETELLI (UNIT EXEC DIRECTOR): $137,168 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To guide and inspire young people, especially those who need us most, to reach their full potential as productive, caring and responsible people.
What it reported doing in 2024
Wakeman memorial association, inc. (the "association") strives to enhance the physical, social and emotional development of area youth through programs that perpetuate sound citizenship. The association's recreational environment provides its membership, over 2,500 boys and girls, with a traditional after school drop-in center, while also serving as an outlet for professionally structured activities in the following three core program areas: academic success, character & leadership and healthy lifestyles. These program offerings include but are not limited to: sports, travel leagues & recreation, out of school time, the arts, health & wellness, teens initiatives, mentoring. Programs provided are focused around safe places, mentorship, mental health, workforce readiness, dei and youth advocacy.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 78
- Transparency & Controls: 66
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 37
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 88.8%; rating input score 89
- Program expense ratio: 74.4%; rating input score 74
- Fundraising efficiency: $8.9 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 88.2%; rating input score 88; 2nd 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: 75.3%; rating input score 75; 20th 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: -17.4%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.55; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 9.7%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 16.9% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 9.9% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 88.8% of revenue deployed · 74.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 24 of 24 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $4.8M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $216K · 28 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $322K reported
- Consistency: 31 of 33 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 2 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 34/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.
- 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.