Cedar Lake - Princeton Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 611272399
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2022–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2021, Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- Louisville, KY, USA
- Phone
- 5024954948
- Rating
- 71
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Housing Support
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $53,455
- Expenses
- $54,413
- Assets
- $175,943
- Liabilities
- $11,929
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
People named in this filing
- BETH SAMMET (SECRETARY)
- WENDY GONZALES (DIRECTOR)
- ALVIN FLETCHER (DIRECTOR)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Our vision is of a community where those with and without disabilities learn to share and enrich each other's lives through meaningful interactions that cultivate mutual respect and unconditional love. Our mission is to offer highly compassionate, capable care for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities so they may experience a life of abundant possibilities.
What it reported doing in 2025
To provide persons with intellectual and developmental disabilities with safe & affordable housing and opportunities for meaningful inclusion in their communities.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 100% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Expenses are high relative to revenue and assets have declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 63
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 49
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 63.3%; rating input score 63
- Program expense ratio: 62.3%; rating input score 62
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -1.8%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.23; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 6.6% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -2.3% per year; rating input score 0; 30th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 63.3% of revenue deployed · 62.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $34K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Related organizations: 17 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.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 39/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 17/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.