Glpa-lead Education Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
923223912
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2023
Location
Novi, MI, USA
Phone
4076875119
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Employment N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$251,375
Expenses
$103,589
Assets
$178,974
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Malcolm Phelan (Treasurer)
  • Jeremy Kaplan (Director)
  • Chiante Lymon (Director)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

GLPA-LEAD Education Fund is a social welfare and educational organization with a mission to educate future leaders in the state on civic engagement and professional development. The organization works to empower ordinary citizens through leadership development and civic education; educate emerging leaders on pressing local and systemic policy issues; educate emerging leaders on functions of local and state government; and, invest in collective solutions to the long-standing issues affecting the lives of residents in Michigan. The organization's vision is to educate community leaders on civic and policy issues, professional development, and the function of local government knowins that success is generated through empowerment of diverse local partnerships in the community.

What it reported doing in 2024

GLPA-LEAD Education Fund is a social welfare and educational organization with a mission to educate future leaders in the state on civic engagement and professional development. Over the year we hosted many trainings both in person and virtually to empower citizens through leadership development and civic education. We worked with people all over the state of Michigan to educate them on pressing local policy issues and the functions of local and state government. Through this work we educated community leaders on civic issues, policy issues, professional development, and the function of local and state government.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 most voting board members are independent. 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: 56
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 78
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 41.2%; rating input score 41
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 58.8%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.73; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 139% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 200% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 41.2% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $104K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 40 of 41 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 41/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.