Ncp Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
392022529
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014
Location
Milwaukee, WI, USA
Phone
4149636151
Rating
46
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Senior Citizens' Housing/Retirement Communities

Reported finances

Revenue
$100,690
Expenses
$24,773
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

People named in this filing

  • TONY BESASIE (DIRECTOR)
  • TYSON CIEPLUCH (DIRECTOR)
  • ANN JANIKOWSKY (EVEC. COMM. MEMBER AT LARGE)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Supporting organization of eastcastle place, inc., a senior housing community in milwaukee, wi.

What it reported doing in 2014

Supporting organization of eastcastle place, inc.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.

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: 90
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 0

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: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 75.4%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -39.3% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -40% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 16 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2009 to 2014
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.