Lauras Village

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
992073984
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Mooresville, NC, USA
Phone
8109693299
Rating
52
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$19,710
Expenses
$6,944
Assets
$14,099
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

People named in this filing

  • ANGELA MILLER (CHAIRMAN)
  • DANIEL PHILLIPS (TRESURER)
  • FELICIA DAVIS (COMMUNICATIONS)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Nonprofit organization dedicated to empowering adults with special needs

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

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: 15
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 69
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 7.8%; rating input score 8
  • Program expense ratio: 22.2%; rating input score 22
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.65 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 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: 64.8%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.03; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 200% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 173.8% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 165.4% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 7.8% of revenue deployed · 22.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 15 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • 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 8/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 22/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 32/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.