Lapeer Neighborhoods Incorporated

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
383034694
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2023
Forms available
Form 990 2023, Form 990-EZ 2020
Location
Lapeer, MI, USA
Phone
8102454221
Rating
48
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,404
Expenses
$4,255
Assets
$53,386
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

People named in this filing

  • ROBIN CHESTNUTT (SECRETARY)
  • LISA LIE (DIRECTOR)
  • JIM MIKUS (CHAIRPERSON)

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 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Lapeer neighborhoods, incorporated mission statement it shall be the purpose of lapeer neighborhoods, incorporated to improve the quality of life for the residents of lapeer by assisting in making all neighborhoods safe, clean, attractive, and economically stable. To this end, lapeer neighborhoods, incorporated shall endeavor to facilitate programs and activities that will directly improve the stability of lapeer neighborhoods such as: 1. Low interest housing rehabilitation loans for low and moderate income households. 2. Low interest loans for historic preservation regardless of household income. 3. Grants to qualified households for emergency repairs and weatherization improvements. 4. Assist in increasing the level of homeownership in lapeer neighborhoods through lease/ownership assistance programs. 5. Maintenance assistance programs for homeowners who are unable to perform extensive maintenance due to disablity or age. 6. Acquire, rehabilitate, and resell houses to qualified househ

What it reported doing in 2023

20% of the wages of the city of lapeer employee who is responsible for co- ordinating the programs of the exempt organization.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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: 10
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 12.6%; rating input score 13
  • Program expense ratio: 7.1%; rating input score 7
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -77%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 12.55; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -15% per year; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -6.4% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 12.6% of revenue deployed · 7.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $300 in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 14 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2018 to 2023
  • 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 13/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 25/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.