Edwardsville Neighbors in Need

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
271703703
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Edwardsville, IL, USA
Phone
6189778937
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Personal Social Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$215,110
Expenses
$207,557
Assets
$193,636
Liabilities
$23,395

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KATIE WIGTON (PRESIDENT)
  • KATHERINE OPEL (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • KATIE WIGTON (PRESIDENT)
  • KATHERINE OPEL (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • CHAD OPEL (TREASURER)

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

Financial hardship donations are made to needy families in the edwardsville, Illinois area. Such donations include the direct payment of medical bills or other emergency expenses including, but not limited to, rent or mortgage payments paid to the landlord or lienholder or grocery money in the form of a gift card. The organization does not distribute cash.

What it reported doing in 2025

Financial hardship donations are made to needy families in the edwardsville, Illinois area. Such donations include the direct payment of medical bills or other emergency expenses including but not limited to rent or mortgage payments paid to the landlord or lienholder or grocery money in the form of a gift card. The organization does not distribute cash. In 2025, edwardsville neighbors in need provided assistance for 42 families at a total of $176,406 in direct payments of medical and housing expenses. The annual maximum assistance allowed per family is $10,000.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.1%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 85%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 3.5%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.93; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.2% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.4% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.1% of revenue deployed · 85% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $176K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2016 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 44/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.