Wisconsin Credit Union Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
260819612
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2011
Location
Madison, WI, USA
Phone
6086404040
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$266,625
Expenses
$252,335
Assets
$920,713
Liabilities
$66,845

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • SARAH WAINSCOTT (DIRECTOR): $419,624 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Foundation resources promote credit union development, help educate credit union staff and volunteers, support programming to enhance financial literacy, and support the credit union system in times of need.

What it reported doing in 2025

The foundation invested in the financial counseling certification program (ficep) that credentialed 12 individuals as credit union certified financial counselors (ccufcs), bringing the program total to over 300. In addition, more than 20 individuals completed the re-certification process. The foundation engaged with system partners to facilitate ficep. The program used the credit union national association's certified credit union financial counselor (ccufc) textbook, which involves self-study and a series of webinars, and enhanced it with additional program content. The additional content offered insights to help participants integrate counseling across multiple touch-points with members, thereby broadening the scope and effectiveness of their effort. Participants had the opportunity to network with other ccufc-certified individuals to discuss expanding counseling programs in their credit unions. The foundation proctors the designation examination for students who earn the ccufc designation following successful completion. Funds from the foundation cut the cost of participation by more than half.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 82% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 77% 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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 67
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90.3%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 94.6%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 90.5%; rating input score 91; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 86
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 5.4%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.65; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.1%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.9% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 90.3% of revenue deployed · 94.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 6 filed program accomplishments · $239K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $420K · 7 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 12 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 14 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 48/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 25/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 27/100.