Hanna Community Center Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
311024517
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Lafayette, IN, USA
Phone
7657420191
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$478,752
Expenses
$421,993
Assets
$629,258
Liabilities
$8,371

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SCOTTY TEAL (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • KAJEN MONROE (EXECUTIVE DI): $12,717 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 mission of the hanna community center is to improve the well-being and quality of life of the community by providing quality programs, services and community interactions for the neighborhood, we serve young people and older adults. Continuing with our mission, we seek to celebrate traditions throughout the greater lafayette area while preserving the culture, heritage and history of african americans and minority groups within tippecanoe county.

What it reported doing in 2024

Community services include the internet cafe, facility use for activities, and the annual thanksgiving dinner. Senior division not only provides a safe place where seniors can gather for community and socialization, but they are able to take part in our wellness programs and use the wellness center. The wellness programs include, but are not limited to, nutrition classes, heart health, balance classes, blood pressure screening, diabetes awareness, and health fairs. The wellness center is a monitored exercise room where the seniors can work out and ear incentives. The seniors also participate in fun social activities: outing, euchre, bingo, and have occasional guest speakers. Emergency services: food pantry provides nutritional food to low to middle income families, individuals, and the elderly. The pantry allows them to stretch their food budget, which allows them more money to meet their financial obligations. In addition, it provides one of their most important basic needs. Over 200 households were served.

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 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 40
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 54
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 43.1%; rating input score 43
  • Program expense ratio: 47.1%; rating input score 47
  • 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: 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: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: 11.9%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.49; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.7% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 43.1% of revenue deployed · 47.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $199K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $13K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 43/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 47/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.