Wisconsin Livestock Identification Consortium Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
260024324
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Madison, WI, USA
Phone
8888081910
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Computer Science

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$512,982
Expenses
$466,510
Assets
$326,604
Liabilities
$116,599

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JULIE SWEENEY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JULIE SWEENEY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $108,292 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Wisconsin livestock identification consortium, inc.'s mission is to create a secure, nationally compatible livestock identification system for the purpose of protecting animal health, safeguarding market access, and offering opportunities to enhance the marketability of Wisconsin livestock products.

What it reported doing in 2025

The Wisconsin livestock identification consortium (wlic) is a multi-species effort led by wisonsin's livestock and industry organizations in cooperation with the Wisconsin department of agriculture (datcp), and the university of Wisconsin extension. Wlic is contributing to and supporting the development of a comprehensive livestock identification program that will enhance the quality and safety of the food supply and add value to the marketing of milk, meat, and other livestock-based products. The Wisconsin livestock premises registration act requires anyone who keeps, houses, or co-mingles livestock to register their premises (farm locations). Wlic is registering premises as the authorized agent of datcp. In 2025, wlic renewed and registered 29,286 premises and recorded 15,772 certified veterinary inspections.the Wisconsin livestock identification consortium (wlic) helps to educate producers, legislators, the general public and the media on the importance of animal disease traceability. Wlic does this through educational meetings, media outreach and materials. Wlic completed an educational traceability video in 2020, which was shared with datcp, the public, producers and students. In 2021, wlic created and disbursed an ear tag kit to ffa chapters across the state of Wisconsin.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 82% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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 a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 63
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 68.3%; rating input score 68
  • Program expense ratio: 75.1%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 9.1%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.7; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.36; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 23.2%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.1% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -10.5% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 68.3% of revenue deployed · 75.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $350K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $108K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 54/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 17/100.