Hennepin County Probationparole Court Services
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 416038839
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2016
- Location
- Minneapolis, MN, USA
- Phone
- 6122507404
- Rating
- 46
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $74,332
- Expenses
- $10,271
- Assets
- $557,254
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
14 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- LATOYA REEVES (PRESIDENT)
- JILL HAHN (VICE PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- LATOYA REEVES (PRESIDENT): $5,000 total reported compensation
- COLIN CAPLE (CO-CHIEF STEWARD): $4,000 total reported compensation
- GREGORY AANENSON (CO-CHIEF STEWARD): $4,000 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To advoocate for and represent hennepin county probation and parole officers by negotiating fair labor agreements, promoting professional standards, and improving public safety services.
What it reported doing in 2025
Resolved grievances through arbritation; participated in the sfscme council 5 annual convention and afscme day-on-the-hill. Also provided training for officers, board members and stewards and had monthly meetings.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 94% 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
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 35
- Transparency & Controls: 79
- Accountability: 5
- Sustainability: 81
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 11.6%; rating input score 12
- Program expense ratio: 83.9%; rating input score 84
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 7th 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 1 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 11
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- 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: 86.2%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 54.26; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: Limited
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 0.2% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 16.3% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 11.6% of revenue deployed · 83.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 6 board members independent · 1 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $9K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $5K · 14 people listed
- Consistency: 15 of 16 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 1 filed schedules
- 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 12/100.
- High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 7 of 8 not reported.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grants require schedule f did not reconcile in the filed values.