Wells-sheridan Co Aging Council Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
510164097
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2018
Forms available
Form 990 2018, Form 990-N 2007
Location
Harvey, ND, USA
Phone
7013244032
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$84,008
Expenses
$69,294
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JUDY WEIGELT (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • CATHY SEEFELD (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • OTTO GEIGLE (DIRECTOR)
  • JUDY WEIGELT (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • DONNA MARTHE (DIRECTOR)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Provide transportation for the elderly

What it reported doing in 2018

Provide transportation for the elderly in the community

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 100% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 94% 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 80.3%; rating input score 80
  • Program expense ratio: 97.4%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 17.5%; rating input score 74; 74th 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 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -17.3% per year; rating input score 0; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -37.7% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 80.3% of revenue deployed · 97.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $67K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 15 of 15 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2011 to 2018
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.