Cedar Riverside Community Services

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
880734975
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2021
Forms available
Form 990 2021
Location
Minneapolis, MN, USA
Phone
6123384192
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$680,787
Expenses
$704,815
Assets
$2,215
Liabilities
$26,243

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Osman Ahmed (Director)
  • Weli Hassan (Executive Dir.)

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 2021. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Provide Food Shelf Services to the Cedar Riverside Community

What it reported doing in 2021

Provided emergency food shelf services to the Cedar Riverside community

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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 19
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -3.5%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 11.85; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 2 board members independent · 0 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $705K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 15 of 15 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization 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: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 19/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 0/100.