Wisconsin Veterans Network Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 821043745
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2017–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- West Allis, WI, USA
- Phone
- 4142573624
- Rating
- 81
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Military, Veterans' Organizations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $559,867
- Expenses
- $488,001
- Assets
- $837,591
- Liabilities
- $22,448
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
11 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- SCOTT VAN KLOMPENBURG (PRESIDENT)
- CARESSA TRALONGO (VICE PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- QUENTIN HATFIELD (EXECUTIVE DIR.): $72,684 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 veterans network's mission is to serve the needs of veterans and their families facing crises. We accomplish that mission through a network of public, private, nonprofit and veteran service organizations, without respect to branch of service or time served.
What it reported doing in 2025
In 2025, we were faced with record levels of requests for assistance resulting from an economy in which the costs of every basic necessity continued to rise while incomes did not keep pace. Most of our clients are in middle and lower income categories, and those categories were hardest hit for those trying to balance the needs of their families. In the last year we served 453 veterans and their families across 45 Wisconsin counties. Affordable housing was the single biggest issue with which we dealt, trying to help people pay rent and find better employment opportunities to help keep up with rising costs. In addition to affordable housing, homelessness and homeless prevention, utility costs, and food insecurity were our biggest challenges to meet. Our model is collaboration with other agencies across the state and, when many of them began to run short on resources, we raised additional emergency resources to help with many of the cases we served. We continued in our outreach to underserved veterans populations including hispanic outreach through spanish language media, both broadcast and online, resulting in 44% increase in numbers reached.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 76% for direct work, and 24% for grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 63
- Transparency & Controls: 94
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 55
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 63.2%; rating input score 63
- Program expense ratio: 72.2%; rating input score 72
- Fundraising efficiency: $10.14 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
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: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th 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; 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: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 12.8%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.72; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 14.9%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 9.9% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 11.3% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 27.6% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 63.2% of revenue deployed · 72.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $352K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $73K · 11 people listed
- Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2017 to 2025
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 35/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 50/100.