Cedar Lake Residences Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
611247246
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Louisville, KY, USA
Phone
5024954946
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Support
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,324,568
Expenses
$9,469,820
Assets
$2,446,663
Liabilities
$2,572,806

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RICK DAVIS (PRESIDENT AND CEO)
  • ILESE ANDERSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (THRU 7.2025))
  • MARY ALLEN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (BEG. 10.2025))

Highest reported compensation

  • RICK DAVIS (PRESIDENT AND CEO): $282,322 total reported compensation
  • MARGARET WAUGH (VP OF FINANCE AND CAO): $187,919 total reported compensation
  • ILESE ANDERSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (THRU 7.2025)): $99,180 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. 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, (see schedule o)

What it reported doing in 2025

Cedar lake residences delivered a wide array of community-based residential options, community access, suported employment, adult day and other in-home support to over 113 adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Cedar lake foundation provided financial assistance of $458,832 to cedar lake residences to cover shortfalls in medicaid funding.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 93% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 15
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87.1%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 76.4%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -13.8%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.26; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.05; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.9%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -3.9% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 87.1% of revenue deployed · 76.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $7.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $282K · 10 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 8/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 2/100.