Belgravia Court Association Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
610890888
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2013
Forms available
Form 990 2013
Location
Louisville, KY, USA
Phone
5022975490
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Development, Construction, Management

Reported finances

Revenue
$98,522
Expenses
$57,277
Assets
$638,224
Liabilities
$127,039

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MIKE KULL (PRESIDENT)
  • TERESA BRYAN-LEWIS (VICE-PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • MIKE KULL (PRESIDENT)
  • TERESA BRYAN-LEWIS (VICE-PRESIDENT)
  • RIC LIGHT (SECRETARY)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Maintenance and physical improvement to the public areas of belgravia court, to improve the appearance of the inner city

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 82% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 82% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 70
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 60.2%; rating input score 60
  • Program expense ratio: 78.7%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 41.9%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 11.14; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.2; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.8% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 60.2% of revenue deployed · 78.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $45K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2010 to 2013
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 19/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.