Native American Community Development Institute
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 412117257
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Minneapolis, MN, USA
- Phone
- 6122354976
- Rating
- 83
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Cultural, Ethnic Awareness
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,828,914
- Expenses
- $2,318,772
- Assets
- $2,323,920
- Liabilities
- $299,372
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Robert Lilligren (President/CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- Robert Lilligren (President/CEO): $139,017 total reported compensation
- Ed Minnema (Chief Operating Officer (through September 2024)): $94,260 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Native American Community Development Institute (NACDI) is an American Indian community development intermediary - the first of its kind in the region - created by and for American Indians. NACDI is committed to transforming the American Indian community to effectively respond to 21st century opportunities. NACDI, working from the premise that deficit and poverty-based strategies must be replaced with comprehensive asset-centered strategies, focuses on promoting innovative ideas and cross-sector partnerships that embrace technology, entrepreneurship, and community development. Our mission is to partner with American Indian communities to build and execute 21st century community development strategies.
What it reported doing in 2024
NACDI's Four Sisters Food Sovereignty programs are connecting neighborhood residents by rebuilding our relationship with the living world. Our work is guided by the community and the engagement in the practices that sustain us physically and culturally. We break the cycles of trauma and social isolation set into motion by the disruption of our traditional ways by rebuilding Indigenous food knowledge and pursuing equitable food systems. Our goal with Four Sisters is to restore health and well-being in the Urban Indian and Phillips communities by recovering knowledge and access to Indigenous food, medicine, and traditions. The Four Sisters programs are creating a more inclusive, welcoming, and accessible ecosystem in this racially and culturally diverse neighborhood. This project will greatly benefit the surrounding neighborhood by bringing together community members, improving healthy food access, and celebrating Indigenous heritage and culture. Four Sisters Urban Farm, through skills training and community gatherings, will seed opportunities to grow fresh and healthy food and heal land, bodies, and spirits.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 75% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 84% 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 77
- Transparency & Controls: 94
- Accountability: 91
- Sustainability: 25
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 88.1%; rating input score 88
- Program expense ratio: 69.4%; rating input score 69
- Fundraising efficiency: $11.87 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 99.9%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- 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: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- 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: -26.8%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 10.1%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 11.8% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 7.5% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 88.1% of revenue deployed · 69.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.6M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $139K · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 43/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 37/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 39/100.