East Lake Foundationinc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
582204306
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2022
Location
Atlanta, GA, USA
Phone
4043734351
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Public Foundations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,307,097
Expenses
$6,102,893
Assets
$70,154,647
Liabilities
$1,406,802

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

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ILHAM ASKIA (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ILHAM ASKIA (PRESIDENT): $260,326 total reported compensation
  • CATHERINE H WOODLING (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $195,276 total reported compensation
  • MEISHA WHITE (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $181,097 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The east lake foundation partners with the village of east lake residents, drew charter school families, and key service providers to provide equitable resources and support for community members to thrive.

What it reported doing in 2024

Resident and community support program - offers resources and support to residents of the villages of east lake mixed-income housing community, with an emphasis on economic stability, career development and community engagement.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 77% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 55% for direct work, and 45% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 78
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 81.3%; rating input score 81
  • Program expense ratio: 73.3%; rating input score 73
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.67 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.2%; rating input score 88; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.7%; rating input score 99; 36th 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: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.2%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 11.5; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.5%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -9.5% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -10.9% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 81.3% of revenue deployed · 73.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $4.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $260K · 21 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 35 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 11 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 8 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 16/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 45/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.