Hannibal Square Community Land Trust Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
134291501
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2013
Location
Winter Park, FL, USA
Phone
4076439111
Rating
48
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Development, Construction, Management

Reported finances

Revenue
$51,035
Expenses
$658,211
Assets
$7,127,298
Liabilities
$6,873,326

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JUAN HOLLINGSWORTH (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • JUAN HOLLINGSWORTH (PRESIDENT)
  • DENISE CHATMAN (TREASURER)
  • Jerry Breckenridge (BOARD MEMBER)

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

The organization is operated exclusively for charitable & educational purposes to provide opportunities for very-low low- and moderate-income families to secure housing within community redevelopment areas in the central Florida region lake orange osceola and seminole counties and their respective municipalities that is decent and affordable and that is controlled by the residents on a long-term basis.

What it reported doing in 2024

The organization has obtained real property that it leases to qualified buyers on a 99 year land lease. The buyer is able to afford to purchase the home by removing the often prohibitive cost of the land from the purchase equation.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

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: 1
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 94
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0.6%; rating input score 1
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 5th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 86
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1,189.7%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 10.83; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.96; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -27.7% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.6% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0.6% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 6 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $295 in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 35 of 44 current checks pass · 9 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 1/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Advertising column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesAccounting column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Insurance column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OfficeExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OtherSalariesAndWages column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX PayrollTaxes column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Travel column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.