Enterprise Housing - Cedar Commons Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
351873035
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015
Location
Carmel, IN, USA
Phone
3175744700
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Development, Construction, Management

Reported finances

Revenue
$524,033
Expenses
$618,124
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • HUGH PETERS (PRESIDENT/TREASURER)

Highest reported compensation

  • HUGH PETERS (PRESIDENT/TREASURER): $38,333 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Enterprise housing - cedar commons, inc., an Indiana not-for-profit corporation, was organized to acquire, own, and operate a 74 unit apartment community in indianapolis, Indiana, known as cedar commons, pursuant to section 223(f) of the national housing act, as amended.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 83% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 10
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 78%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -18%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.2%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3.2% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -18.6% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 78% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $482K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $38K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2010 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 9 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 52/100.