Lincoln Park Children and Families Collaborative
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 274990487
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2016–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Jul 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2014
- Location
- Duluth, MN, USA
- Phone
- 2184640588
- Rating
- 80
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Emergency Assistance
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $685,625
- Expenses
- $602,774
- Assets
- $398,949
- Liabilities
- $183,098
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
9 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JODI BROADWELL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
People named in this filing
- ROSEANN CARLSON (Director)
- CHRISTINA ST MARIE (Director)
- VANNI HAYDEN (Director)
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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To support children and families by connecting them to resources and opportunities, embracing our cultures, and building community and well being through strong & equitable leadership
What it reported doing in 2024
Supported Family Time Visits we hosted in 2024 by County include: St. Louis County: 209 Coaching; 666 Observation; 412 Transports; 76 Virtual Visits; 951 Total; 70 Families; 118 Children; Carlton County: 68 Coaching; 11 Observation; 70 Transports; 5 Virtual Visits; 78 Total; 5 Families; 10 Children; Crow Wing County: 6 Coaching; 7 Observations; 3 Transport 0 Virtual Visits; 13 Total; 2 Families; 6 Children; Stearns County: 0 Coaching; 14 Observation; 15 Transports; 14 Total; 1 Family; 1 Child; San Diego County: 0 Coaching; 3 Observation; 0 Transport; 3 Total; 1 Family; 2 Children; SFT All Counties:283 Coaching; 701 Observation; 500 Transport; 81 Virtual Visit; 1059 Total; 79 Families; 137 Children
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 74% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and some filed totals do not add up.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 77
- Transparency & Controls: 80
- Accountability: 88
- Sustainability: 51
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 81.6%; rating input score 82
- Program expense ratio: 92.8%; rating input score 93
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 75%; rating input score 75; 0th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- 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: 12.1%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.66; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.46; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 17.7% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 15.6% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 23.3% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 81.6% of revenue deployed · 92.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 7 filed program accomplishments · $559K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
- Consistency: 18 of 23 current checks pass · 5 findings to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2016 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX CompCurrentOfficersDirectors column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX CompDisqualPersons column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OfficeExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 17/100.