Cherry Hill Strong Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
881855883
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-PF 2022
Location
Baltimore, MD, USA
Phone
4438562457
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$394,953
Expenses
$823,078
Assets
$1,021,962
Liabilities
$59,212

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ZEEVELLE NOTTINGHAM LEMON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ZEEVELLE NOTTINGHAM LEMON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $108,150 total reported compensation
  • NATASHA MUHAMMAD (DEPUTY DIRECTOR): $94,500 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Cherry hill strong coordinates projects and programs, in step with the community and in partnership with the philanthropic community, across four pillar areas of education, affordable housing, community wellness and economic vitality.

What it reported doing in 2024

Community health extends beyond physical well-being and healthcare access. To address this, we are partnering with existing organizations and developing a strong network of resources for cherry hill residents. Medstar harbor hospital is a key partner, serving as the largest provider of medical, psychiatric, and behavioral healthcare. We are also committed to addressing social determinants of health. Work with partners to create facilities, outdoor spaces, and programs that promote well-being, address food deserts, foster culture, and meet environmental needs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 80% 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

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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 20
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 67.5%; rating input score 67
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -108.4%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.24; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 24.6%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 18.4% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -107.1% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 22.7% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 67.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $555K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $108K · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 46/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.