Wisconsin Concrete Paving Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
390875000
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Madison, WI, USA
Phone
6082401020
Rating confidence
Limited

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$701,696
Expenses
$743,832
Assets
$1,009,588
Liabilities
$82,300

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JACKIE SPOOR (PRESIDENT/SECRETARY)

Highest reported compensation

  • JACKIE SPOOR (PRESIDENT/SECRETARY): $186,301 total reported compensation
  • LESLIE ASHAUER (DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING): $130,697 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The Wisconsin concrete pavement association will be recognized as the statewide representative for the concrete pavement industry by providing a resource for education, developing new markets and technology, and fostering a membership dedicated to building a meaningful public and private partnerships for the purpose of promoting the use of concrete pavement as the best pavement value.

What it reported doing in 2025

The Wisconsin concrete pavement association holds conferences, technical meetings, produces literature, maintains a website, and purchases technical and promotional literature from the american concrete pavement association, the portland cement association, and the national center for concrete pavement technology. The association hold its annual large two-and-a-half-day technical conference in february 2025. It is open to all state, city, county, and consulting engineers in addition to the members of the association. Over 300 attended the event in 2025. In addition, the association hosted, supported, and attended over 25 different conferences and short courses during the year to advance the engineering, science, and technology of concrete pavement and associated concrete products. Over 100 meetings were held during 2025 with the Wisconsin department of transportation (dot) for the purpose of working on engineering, technical issues and research projects regarding dot standards, specifications, or specific construction projects.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 97% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 80
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • 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: 89.7%; rating input score 90; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -6%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.36; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 42.6%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.4% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 14 of 15 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $186K · 16 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 10 of 11 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 18/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 37/100.