City of Pontiac Retired Employees Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
454028812
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Pontiac, MI, USA
Phone
2485059463
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$29,905
Expenses
$13,193
Assets
$32,876
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

1 person listed

People named in this filing

  • NA

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To represent the interests of retired employees of the city of pontiac, Michigan in regard to thier retirement benefits from the city, including all types of health and medical benefits and insurance, including advocacy, lobbying, and/or litigation. No funds or assets of the corporation shall be used for the personal benefit of any person.

What it reported doing in 2025

To represent the interests of retired employees of the city of pontiac, Michigan in regard to their retirement benefits from the city, including all types of health and medical benefits and insurance benefits, including advocacy, lobbying, and/or litigation. No funds or assets of the corporation shall be used for the personal benefit of any person.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 72% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
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 revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 58
  • Sustainability: 69
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 44.1%; rating input score 44
  • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 55.9%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.49; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.2% per year; rating input score 0; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1% per year; rating input score 0; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 44.1% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 160 of 160 board members independent · 0 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $13K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 1 people listed
  • Consistency: 13 of 13 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 44/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 41/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.