Wisconsin State Telecommunications Association Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
390845874
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Monona, WI, USA
Phone
6082568866
Rating
38
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,205,293
Expenses
$1,171,546
Assets
$2,408,905
Liabilities
$427,668

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KENT KLIMA (PRESIDENT, D)
  • TERRY KUCERA (PRESIDENT-EL)

Highest reported compensation

  • WILLIAM ESBECK (SECR, TRSR,): $262,003 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 be the premier state association of Wisconsin's diverse telecommunications providers united to: lead and excel in service quality, reliability and information security; advocate effectively for legislative and regulatory reform; build consensus by providing an effective forum for industry discussion; promote an advanced integrated infrastructure; provide a high quality telecommunications resource to inform and educate members, regulators, legislators and customers; support appropriate enhancements to public safety and homeland security.

What it reported doing in 2024

Regulatory - wsta is active in issues that have an industry-wide impact on telecommunications providers in Wisconsin. Wsta represents member companies before the public service commission of Wisconsin (pscw) (the agency responsible for regulating telecommunications providers at the state level); the federal communications commission (fcc) (the agency responsible for telecommunications regulation at the federal level), as well as various courts on occasion. Wsta was active on issues before the pscw, including issues relating to locating buried facilities, psc broadband mapping, and the broadhead expansion grant program. At the fcc, wsta participated in our closely followed issues including universal service fund reform, intercarrier compensation reform, and rural development opportunity fund.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 92% 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

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • 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: 2.8%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.06; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.18; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 22.4%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.2% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $262K · 13 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 14 of 15 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 44/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 33/100.