Hickory Lane One Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
522298460
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Salisbury, MD, USA
Phone
4105460381
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Low-Income & Subsidized Rental Housing

Reported finances

Revenue
$143,672
Expenses
$179,001
Assets
$1,738,531
Liabilities
$2,600,679

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DIMITRIOS CAVATHAS (CEO)
  • MEGAN MULLER (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOYCE SCHULDT (CFO): $229,717 total reported compensation
  • DIMITRIOS CAVATHAS (CEO): $222,694 total reported compensation
  • PAM KARPIN (CHRO): $124,458 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide affordable housing for the elderly under section 202 of the national housing act.

What it reported doing in 2024

Hickory lane one, inc. Is a Maryland corporation organized in 2000 for the purpose of acquiring, developing and operating housing and related facilities which consists of a 20-unit apartment community for the elderly. The entity receives assistance under provisions of section 202 of the national housing act of 1959, as amended. Such projects are regulated by the u.s. Department of housing and urban development (hud) as to rent charges and operating methods.

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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 62
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 90%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -24.6%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 9.71; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.5; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: Limited

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.6% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 90% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 12 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $161K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $230K · 12 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 4 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 12/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.