Women in Manufacturing Education Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
810921604
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Cleveland, OH, USA
Phone
2165035700
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$760,629
Expenses
$630,114
Assets
$672,536
Liabilities
$149,445

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

Leadership & pay

26 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ALLISON GREALIS (PRESIDENT & FOUNDER)
  • GRETCHEN MOORE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, WIMEF)

Highest reported compensation

  • ALLISON GREALIS (PRESIDENT & FOUNDER): $410,950 total reported compensation
  • GRETCHEN MOORE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, WIMEF): $131,377 total reported compensation
  • SUSAN HUNTER-VAZINSKI (DIRECTOR OF MARKETING & COMM.): $115,127 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The women in manufacturing education foundation is a 501(c)(3) organization focused on supporting the educational and training needs of women in manufacturing careers. The education foundation currently funds projects and programs that directly impact the education and advancement of manufacturing women.

What it reported doing in 2025

Women in production program (wip)- the wim education foundation launched this program in 2021 to support the development of employees in production or shop-floor roles at manufacturing companies. This program is open to any production employee, with a goal of imparting core professional skills for success in production environments. In 2025, 275 people participated in the wip program which includes asynchronous learning, one-on-one coaching, a strengthsfinders skills assessment, and monthly peer networking.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 62% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 54
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 62.7%; rating input score 63
  • Program expense ratio: 75.6%; rating input score 76
  • 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 17.2%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.07; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.22; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 19.2% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 19.3% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.3% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 62.7% of revenue deployed · 75.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 21 of 21 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $476K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $411K · 26 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $119K reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2016 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 24/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 50/100.