Magnet Lending Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
854188860
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Lansing, MI, USA
Phone
5173340545
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Urban, Community Economic Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,930,996
Expenses
$414,575
Assets
$13,606,021
Liabilities
$10,243,069

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ERIC HANNA (PRESIDENT & CEO; DIRECTOR)
  • MARILYN CHRUMKA (VICE PRESIDENT OF DEVELOPM)
  • ELISABETH ALEXANDRIAN (VICE PRESIDENT OF COMPLIAN)

Highest reported compensation

  • ERIC HANNA (PRESIDENT & CEO; DIRECTOR): $304,886 total reported compensation
  • ADRIANNE JENKINS (CFO / COO): $241,233 total reported compensation
  • MARILYN CHRUMKA (VICE PRESIDENT OF DEVELOPM): $191,203 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Magnet lending corporation is a Michigan nonprofit formed to promote community and economic development, the creation of wealth and job opportunities, and to facilitate investment of private and public capital in the form of low-cost, flexible financial products, coupled with development services. Mlc's financial products and development services are designed to create and preserve affordable and attainable housing, invest in job-creating community-driven economic development projects, and promote the economic mobility of low- and moderate income residents and communities in the state of Michigan.

What it reported doing in 2024

Loan issuance

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 65% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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 - 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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 49
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 76
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 27.7%; rating input score 28
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • 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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 78.5%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 32.82; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.75; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 37.4%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 65.6% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 46.7% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 44% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 27.7% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 14 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $415K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $305K · 18 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 28/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 10/100.