Community-engaged Alliance

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
821541096
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Indianapolis, IN, USA
Phone
3179463484
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,137,203
Expenses
$566,631
Assets
$1,209,379
Liabilities
$53,506

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ELIJAH HOWE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ELIJAH HOWE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $145,226 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Community-engaged alliance is a non-profit partnership of Indiana's public, private, and community college higher education institutions focused on advocating, implementing, and improving community engagement efforts so that students graduate as well-informed, engaged, and productive members of society who are fully enabled to provide leadership and service that advances the public good in their communities.

What it reported doing in 2024

The lilly endowment program supports programming and sub-grants Indiana institutions of higher education that offer high-impact education practices and professional development opportunities for faculty and staff that help develop the next generation of civic leaders, create teaching, support, and assessment practices that strengthen community-based teaching and research and the collective impact of the institution within the local community. These programs engaged a total of 3,200 individuals at 40 higher education campuses throughout Indiana.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 81% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 74% for direct work, and 26% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. 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: 54
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 70
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 36.4%; rating input score 36
  • Program expense ratio: 69.3%; rating input score 69
  • Fundraising efficiency: $157,496.14 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 82%; rating input score 82; 35th 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 50.2%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.13; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 25.6%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.4% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.3% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 36.4% of revenue deployed · 69.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $393K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $145K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 6 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 36/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.