Lss Housing Mill Road Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
391787556
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
West Allis, WI, USA
Phone
4142462300
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Senior Citizens' Housing/Retirement Communities

Reported finances

Revenue
$98,272
Expenses
$96,982
Assets
$267,460
Liabilities
$65,154

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • HECTOR COLON (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • HECTOR COLON (PRESIDENT): $550,190 total reported compensation
  • JOSEPH ARZBECKER (VP/ASST SECRETARY): $349,981 total reported compensation
  • RANDY OLESZAK (VP/ASST TREASURER): $342,798 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Act compassionately. Serve humbly. Lead courageously.

What it reported doing in 2024

Lss housing, mill road, inc (mill road) is a service corporation for the purpose of providing premier low-income housing facilities and services for our tenants. Mill road offers 8 units of subsidized housing for developmentallydisabled persons in cooperation with the us dept of housing & urban development. Mill road is managed by lutheran social services of Wisconsin and upper Michigan whose mission is "act compassionately. Serve humbly. Lead coureously." some of the property's amenities include an on-site manager, community room, on-site laundry facilities, well maintained landscaping with outdoor seating areas, pets allowed, secure building, cable hookup and furnished refrigerators and ranges.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 99% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 72
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87.3%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 88.4%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 60%; rating input score 60; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.3%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.76; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.24; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 111.8%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.3% per year; rating input score 0; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 87.3% of revenue deployed · 88.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 10 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $86K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $550K · 10 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 23 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 57/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Conflict-of-interest policy not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 14/100.