Lake Trust Credit Union Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
455332078
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2017
Location
Brighton, MI, USA
Phone
8882677200
Rating
62
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Centers to Support the Independence of Specific Populations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$320,817
Expenses
$261,068
Assets
$1,045,631
Liabilities
$10,000

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAVID SNODGRASS (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • DAVID SNODGRASS (PRESIDENT): $1,049,249 total reported compensation
  • THERESA DUBIEL (BOARD MEMBER): $292,371 total reported compensation
  • BRANDALYNN WINCHESTER-MIDDLEBROOK (TREASURER): $273,755 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 create healthy and vibrant communities through educating, engaging, and giving in the areas of economic empowerment and community enhancement.

What it reported doing in 2024

Lake trust credit union foundation is a Michigan nonprofit corporation that was established in 2013 with a mission to help build and sustain healthy and vibrant communities through partnerships, outreach programs, grants, and support. The foundation's priorities are empowering entrepreneurs, enabling youth to thrive, fostering economic equity, supporting attainable and secure housing, and strengthening community resilience.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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 voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 61
  • Accountability: 32
  • Sustainability: 62
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75.5%; rating input score 75
  • Program expense ratio: 92%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 26th 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: 63%; rating input score 63; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: 18.6%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.01; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 56.9%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 20.5% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 16.3% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 24.6% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 75.5% of revenue deployed · 92% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $240K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1M · 5 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 11 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.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 46/100.