Wisconsin Restaurant Association Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 390715690
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2013–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Madison, WI, USA
- Phone
- 6082709950
- Rating confidence
- Limited
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,930,671
- Expenses
- $2,098,061
- Assets
- $1,350,859
- Liabilities
- $1,173,276
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
35 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- KRISTINE HILLMER (PRESIDENT & CEO)
- SUSAN QUAM (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- KRISTINE HILLMER (PRESIDENT & CEO): $218,226 total reported compensation
- SUSAN QUAM (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT): $137,880 total reported compensation
- DAWN FARIS (VP MEMBERSHIP & BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT): $129,528 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To provide members the services and tools to be successful, through advocacy, education and communication. As an advocate, wra provides representation for the restaurant industry to create a favorable political and regulatory environment at all levels of government. Education includes providing access to information to improve restaurant operations and fostering a sense of community in the restaurant industry with opportunities for members to connect with and learn from each other. Wra communicates for the membership providing a voice for the restaurant industry to consumers and the media.
What it reported doing in 2024
Government relations - the government relations program was developed to review and recommend positions on legislative issues of interest to the food service industry and the association. The program also serves to maintain positive relationships with elected and appointed government officials and advise members on proposed legislation and existing laws. Government relations also include the restaurant advocacy fund, which develops funding and programs to educate the association membership, general public, legislature, and regulatory bodies on the association's public policy.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 81% 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: 70
- Accountability: 91
- Sustainability: 20
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: Limited
- Program expense ratio: Limited
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
- Compensation committee: Pass
- 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: 65.2%; rating input score 65; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- 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: -8.7%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.64; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.87; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 23.1%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: -2.4% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 0.2% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
- Governance: 32 of 32 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
- Leadership: top reported pay $218K · 35 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 14 of 15 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
- Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 2 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 — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 18/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 8/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.