Wv Cant Wait Mutual Aid a Non-profit Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
861651437
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2022
Location
Charleston, WV, USA
Phone
3046106512
Rating
47
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Civil Rights, Social Action, Advocacy N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$813,646
Expenses
$667,975
Assets
$762,766
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Stephen Smith (Co-Chair): $138,824 total reported compensation
  • Jodi Sine (Finance Officer): $135,092 total reported compensation
  • Katey Lauer (Co-Chair): $112,358 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

WV Cant Wait Mutual Aid works to support grassroots mutual aid efforts community organizing and civic engagement throughout West Virginia. The organization provides training coaching strategy support convenings and educational workshops for mutual aid groups community members and local leaders working to address unmet community needs. Programs include community organizing trainings governance and leadership workshops safety trainings one-on-one coaching and support for local collaborative projects and initiatives that strengthen communities across the state.

What it reported doing in 2025

Provided training coaching convenings workshops and strategy support for grassroots mutual aid groups community organizers and local leaders throughout West Virginia. Programs included community organizing trainings governance and leadership workshops safety trainings one-on-one coaching and collaborative convenings focused on addressing unmet community needs and strengthening local civic engagement.

Operating model

Revenue model
Affiliate-supported. 92% of the money available for current operations came from contributions from related organizations.
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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and a relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 43
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 5
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 45.3%; rating input score 45
  • Program expense ratio: 55.2%; rating input score 55
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 81.8%; rating input score 82; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 61.6%; rating input score 62; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: Limited
  • Governance controls: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 17.9%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.14; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 28.9%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 30.3% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 19.8% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 24.2% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 45.3% of revenue deployed · 55.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $369K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $139K · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 39 of 42 current checks pass · 3 findings to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2021 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 45/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 55/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 47/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX AllOtherExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.