Washington Township Michigan Goodfellows Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 800667971
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2011–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024
- Location
- Washington Township, MI, USA
- Phone
- 5863623310
- Rating
- 88
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Human Service Organizations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $615
- Expenses
- $19,759
- Assets
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- STANLEY BABINSKI (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- STANLEY BABINSKI (PRESIDENT)
- LARRY BINFET (OFFICER)
- DANIEL DETKOWSKI (OFFICER)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The members of the Washington township goodfellows solicit, collect, and otherwise raise money for charitable, philanthropic, educational and benevolent purposes; to expend, contribute, disburse and otherwise handle and dispose of same for such purposes, either directly or by contributions to those in need or to other agencies, orgaizations and institutions organized for the same or similar purposes.
What it reported doing in 2024
Donated 1, 50 dollar gift card to needy family from stony church. Donated 3,876.66 to stoney church. Donated 3,876.66 to metro detroit youth clubs. Donated 3,876.66 Washington twp fire fighter assoc for christmas for needy families. Donated 3,876.66 to Washington twp lions club.
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
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: 99
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 8
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 98.1%; rating input score 98
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -3,112.8%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 9% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 1.8% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 13.5% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 98.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $19K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.