District 1 Community Council

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
411350041
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Saint Paul, MN, USA
Phone
6515787600
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$218,208
Expenses
$151,924
Assets
$215,864
Liabilities
$33,711

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Ioannes Houmas (Executive Director)
  • John Slade (President)
  • Brandon Griffin (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Ioannes Houmas (Executive Director): $30,143 total reported compensation
  • John Slade (President): $1,500 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Neighborhood Communication and Advocacy. District 1 Community Council is the official neighborhood organization for our beautiful SE corner of St. Paul, MN -- District 1, which includes the neighborhoods of Eastview, Conway, Battle Creek and Highwood, as well as the Pig's Eye Lake area.

What it reported doing in 2025

Provide advisory recommendations to city officials on physical, economic, and social development issues. Identify neighborhood needs, initiate community programs, recruit volunteers, raise funds, answer questions, and more. Serve as the neighborhoods' primary information and referral source for city programs, policies and issues.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 98% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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 a large share of total spending goes to programs. 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: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 57
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 53.9%; rating input score 54
  • Program expense ratio: 77.4%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $18.2 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • 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: 30.4%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.42; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.16; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20.8%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 24.4% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 53.9% of revenue deployed · 77.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $118K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $30K · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 54/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 53/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 50/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.