Greater Lansing Non-profit Housing Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237135627
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2018
Forms available
Form 990 2018
Location
Lansing, MI, USA
Phone
5178532501
Rating
57
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Development, Construction, Management

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$305,349
Expenses
$338,849
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DIANE SANBORN (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • KIM SHAPIRO (EXECUTIVE DI): $15,631 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Helping our community to prosper by providing quality housing assistance for all, revitalizing neighborhoods and empowering residents through education and counseling.

What it reported doing in 2018

Greater lansing housing coalition rehabiltated dilapidated homes in a target area of lansing, mi. These homes were then sold to families who meet low income qualifications. Homeownership is the goal.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 62% for direct work, and 38% for grants.

The verdict

MIXED - 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 40
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 15
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 35.1%; rating input score 35
  • Program expense ratio: 29.2%; rating input score 29
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5,206.95 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings

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; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: No; rating input score 0
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -11%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.6%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -20% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -13.6% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -13.5% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 35.1% of revenue deployed · 29.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $99K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $16K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2010 to 2018
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 7 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 35/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 29/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Major donor itemization scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 38/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.