Marian Park Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
362750105
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Denver, CO, USA
Phone
3038303300
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,714,082
Expenses
$2,988,150
Assets
$5,636,401
Liabilities
$10,728,305

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KASSIDI BOENING (VICE PRESIDENT/DIRECTOR)
  • MELISSA CLAYTON (VICE PRESIDENT/DIRECTOR)
  • EDGAR FLAGG III (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • FATMAH FARRAJ (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MARK ANGELINI (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MELISSA CLAYTON (VICE PRESIDENT/DIRECTOR): $308,489 total reported compensation
  • MARK ANGELINI (PRESIDENT): $264,448 total reported compensation
  • JOE ROSENBLUM (SECRETARY/DIRECTOR): $242,964 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Marian park, inc. (the "corporation") was organized april 26, 1972, as an Illinois non-stock, nonprofit organization for the purpose of constructing and operating a rental housing project under section 236 of the national housing act. Such projects are regulated by hud as to rent charges and operating methods. The project consists of 210 units located in wheaton, Illinois and is currently operating under the name marian park, inc. (the property).

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 69% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 32
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.6%; rating input score 79
  • Program expense ratio: 97.7%; rating input score 98
  • 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 19.5%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.89; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.9; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.7%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.5% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.7% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78.6% of revenue deployed · 97.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $308K · 7 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 497 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.