Waskawiwin

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
932443651
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2024
Location
Saint Paul, MN, USA
Phone
6513566266
Rating
62
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$527,455
Expenses
$59,557
Assets
$467,899
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Davida Delmar (Director): $2,250 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Waskawiwin provides training and education to support the building and maintaining of high-speed communications networks for Indigenous communities and acts as a governing body and fiscal organization providing fundraising and administrative support.

What it reported doing in 2025

Waskawiwin convened four Tribal Broadband Bootcamps in 2025 gathering approximately 230 participants from Tribal Nations across the West Southwest and Midwest. Each TBB brings together Tribal broadband practitioners ISP operators technical specialists and host community members for hands-on learning grounded in the host Tribes own deployment context. The March 18 and November 3 gatherings at RantanenTown Ranch CA focused on California Tribes working with the California Middle Mile Broadband Network. The April 7 gathering at Pueblo of Jemez - the first TBB in New Mexico - featured the work of JNet the Pueblos Tribal ISP. The August 18 Sault Ste. Marie MI bootcamp convened Tribes from the upper Midwest. TBBs are structured around peer learning rather than top-down instruction so that broadband capacity-building remains rooted in tribal sovereignty.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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 - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 38
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 72
  • Sustainability: 89
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 8.7%; rating input score 9
  • Program expense ratio: 69.8%; rating input score 70
  • Fundraising efficiency: $164.06 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings

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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 88.7%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.86; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.8%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 8.7% of revenue deployed · 69.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 6 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $42K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $2K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 40 of 41 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 9/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 52/100.