Naveo Credit Union

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
041144988
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Somerville, MA, USA
Phone
6177025128
Rating
47
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,053,625
Expenses
$7,968,830
Assets
$171,284,500
Liabilities
$162,727,120

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANDREA WHITE (PRESIDENT/CE)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANDREA WHITE (PRESIDENT/CE): $512,858 total reported compensation
  • KAREN YEE (SVP/CHIEF LE): $209,304 total reported compensation
  • BRENDA TAM (CFO): $209,046 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 promotion of thrift among its members by the accumulation of their savings and the loaning of such savings back to its members at a moderate rate of interest. Participation in the credit union is limited to those individuals who qualify for membership. The field of membership is defined in the credit union's bylaws with a significant concentration of members residing in somerville and cambridge, Massachusetts and surrounding communities.

What it reported doing in 2024

Maintenance of member share and deposit accounts, and the payment of dividends thereon with the purpose of lending to members at competitive interest rates. Total number of deposit accounts were 13,145 and total number of loan accounts were 1,710.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 76% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 80
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 20th 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: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.1%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 21.49; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.95; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.9%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 9 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $513K · 14 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $1.4M reported
  • Consistency: 12 of 13 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • 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 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.