Western Guaranty Fund Services

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
840955267
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Denver, CO, US
Phone
(303) 759-5066 / (800) 303-7565
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,662,496
Expenses
$2,662,496
Assets
$850,669
Liabilities
$850,669

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Chad Anderson (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Chad Anderson (President): $314,709 total reported compensation
  • Lorraine Segedie (Controller/CFO): $235,151 total reported compensation
  • Alex Rambau (IT/Admin Manager): $207,341 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To provide management and claims supervisory services to insurance guaranty associations; to assist guaranty associations in the discharge of their statutory responsibilities; and to promptly and efficiently handle covered claims against insolvent insurers.

What it reported doing in 2025

Western Guaranty Fund Services provides accounting, administration and management for seven property and casualty insurance guaranty associations. In total, over 8,500 checks were issued paying over $16 million to claimants and providers during 2025. At year end, there were 1,594 open claims with over $96 million in estimated future claim obligations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 100% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 16
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 90%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • 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: 0%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.32; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 34.7%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 90% of revenue deployed · 90% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $315K · 11 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $377K reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 26/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 10/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.