Minneapolis American Indian Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
410966005
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2022
Location
Minneapolis, MN, USA
Phone
6128791700
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Ethnic, Immigrant Centers

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$12,262,084
Expenses
$12,048,841
Assets
$28,505,337
Liabilities
$6,565,361

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Sam Olbekson (President)
  • Eileen Briggs (Vice President)
  • Mary LaGarde-Agnew (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Mary LaGarde-Agnew (Executive Director): $157,139 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Services provided include education, community development, youth programs, employment assistance, information dissemination, health and wellness programs, elder services, and child welfare.

What it reported doing in 2024

Child Welfare: Indian Child Welfare Act and Family Services Program provides essential services to meet the needs of American Indian families experiencing difficulties within the social welfare system. Services include court monitoring to ensure compliance with Federal and State laws, Native American family referral network, Tribal Liaison to assist out-state Tribes and members, family stability program to prevent involvement in the child protection system and case management system to assist Tribes communicating with urban agencies handling the cases and Bright Beginnings program to help American Indian Women who are pregnant and/or new mothers who have a history of substance abuse to achieve and maintain recovery in order to keep the families intact and provide a nurturing environment of the children. 549 unduplicated individuals served and 242 families served.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 83% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 61% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some related-organization disclosures are missing and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 80.1%; rating input score 80
  • Program expense ratio: 81%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $112.44 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Scored; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.7%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.37; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.23; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.3%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 38.1% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 29.9% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 24.2% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 80.1% of revenue deployed · 81% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 10 filed program accomplishments · $9.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $157K · 7 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $416K reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

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 — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 41/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 55/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.