Indianapolis Neighborhood Resource Center Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
351909230
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Indianapolis, IN, USA
Phone
3179200330
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Support N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$615,370
Expenses
$833,801
Assets
$326,880
Liabilities
$44,389

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Akilah Webster (Executive Director)
  • Britt Redd (Interim Executive Director)
  • Gina Lewis Alexander (President)
  • Joe Housh (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Akilah Webster (Executive Director): $78,073 total reported compensation
  • Britt Redd (Interim Executive Director): $21,408 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

INRC was established to provide training and technical assistance to neighborhood-based organizations and community development corporations throughout Marion County.

What it reported doing in 2025

Information resource and referral services for neighborhood-based organizations - inrc provided comprehensive support to neighborhood-based organizations through individualized training, workshops, seminars, and coaching. We served over 700 individuals from local communities and partner organizations, covering essential topics such as collaboration, project management, inclusion, and leadership. Additionally, six neighborhoods completed the indianapolis community building institute (icbi), a leadership development program tailored for grassroots community leaders. Inrc also offered capacity- building assistance to five neighborhood-based organizations, which included customized training sessions, neighborhood planning, project consultation, asset mapping, and meeting facilitation. Inrc awarded its 19th annual collaborative spirit award to fountain square neighborhood association

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 96% 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. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 15
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75.2%; rating input score 75
  • Program expense ratio: 55.5%; rating input score 55
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.94 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 72.5%; rating input score 73; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -35.5%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.39; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.14; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.9%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.2% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 75.2% of revenue deployed · 55.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $463K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $78K · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 55/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 32/100.