Community Lending Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
264558073
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2013–2015
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Boston, MA, USA
Phone
6176959990
Rating
58
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$252
Expenses
$35
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JEFFREY THIELMAN (BOARD MEMBER & CEO)

People named in this filing

  • RITA MCDONOUGH (CFO & TREASURER)
  • DAVID SULLIVAN (BOARD MEMBER)
  • WILLIAM J GILLETT (BOARD CHAIR)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Community lending corporation (clc) was formed in may, 2009 as a community based non-profit to provide financing, technical assistance and business support services to underserved populations including refugees, asylees, immigrants, minorities, women, and businesses in low to moderate income areas. During 2016, clc was dissolved and its remaining assets and liabilities were transfered to a related organization who is carrying on the exempt purpose.

What it reported doing in 2015

Clc worked with both established and startup entrepreneurs with the goal of fostering economic self-sufficiency for the individual, and economic prosperity and job creation for the 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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 46
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 54
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 13.9%; rating input score 14
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 86.1%; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -87.4% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -49.5% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -73.5% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 13.9% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $35 in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2013 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 14/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.