Wisconsin Pharmacy Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
391817686
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Madison, WI, USA
Phone
6088279200
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$207,784
Expenses
$310,579
Assets
$1,542,051
Liabilities
$69,769

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • SARAH SORUM (SECRETARY-TREASURER): $274,109 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Wisconsin pharmacy foundation is a non-profit, tax-exempt organization to support and pursue professional education and research programs to advance the science and practice of pharmacy. Working in coordination with psw, the foundation supports unique educational opportunities and leadership development for Wisconsin pharmacists and student pharmacists and pursues practice-based research projects. The foundation also pursues fundraising efforts through gifts from pharmacy society of Wisconsin (psw) members, research grants, and other charitable gifts to enable the organization to contract for services and pursue its programs.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Wisconsin pharmacy foundation is a non-profit, tax-exempt organization to support and pursue professional education and research programs to advance the science and practice of pharmacy.working in coordination with the pharmacy society of Wisconsin, the foundation promotes innovation to accelerate the development of leaders and the workforce that advance pharmacy.immunizewi - promoting Wisconsin vaccine equity through pharmacy engagement - the Wisconsin pharmacy foundation (wpf) and the pharmacy society of Wisconsin (psw) aimed to sustainably increase vaccination equity and rates by using a systems-change approach to address health equity and social determinants of health (sdoh) barriers. This approach involved partnering pharmacies with community-based organizations (cbos) as cultural brokers. The primary objectives were to serve the populations that experience high levels of inequities and sdoh barriers. We successfully engaged eight partners (four dyads) in four different Wisconsin counties. Over the course of the grant period, the four days produced 16 educational sessions. It is estimated that the programming reached 345 participants. The educational sessions produced 52 referrals for a one-on-one discussion about vaccines with a pharmacist.mobilizing communities for a just response - this program implemented pharmacist-provided, community-based, culturally sensitive vaccine and immunization education. Educational sessions were provided as part of regularly scheduled events and routine operating practices of the partnering community-based organizations (cbos) (e.g., community picnics, health fairs, health risk assessments, hmong new year, diabetes support group, food pantry, community dinners, and a holiday gift exchange/party). This program included partnering with six community pharmacies and six cbos across four distinct counties within Wisconsin. A total of 58 educational sessions were conducted across the six days. Partners participated in nine cohort meetings, facilitated by the wpf/psw staff, to collaboratively discuss educational program successes and challenges. Implementing this integrated educational model into the community, built trust and supported sustainability, facilitated bi-directional communication between the cbos and pharmacies while continuing to improve participant health literacy, created a pharmacy home and ultimately decreased vaccine hesitancy to improve vaccination rates in underserved populations.decker-temple leadership pharmacy conference - provide conference participants with strong leadership training. Increase awareness of issues impacting the profession of pharmacy nationally and in their own state. Encourage the involvement of all new practitioners in professional and community activities. Develop new practitioners for leadership positions within the profession.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 86% 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 the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91%; rating input score 91
  • Program expense ratio: 51.4%; rating input score 51
  • Fundraising efficiency: $499.74 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -49.5%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.97; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.5%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -8.1% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -8.8% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.3% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 91% of revenue deployed · 51.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $160K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $274K · 9 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 33/100.