Neighbor 2 Neighbor

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
621817514
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Whites Creek, TN, USA
Phone
6157828212
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$65,366
Expenses
$136,044
Assets
$107,123
Liabilities
$14,581

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • ALISHA HADDOCK (EXECUTIVE DI): $85,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Human and community services

What it reported doing in 2025

Training and mentoring services are provided to residents and neighborhood organizations at all levels of development. The annual conference for neighborhoods is a one-day training and networking opportunity for anyone who wants to make a difference in their neighborhood. The neighborhood leadership certificate program provides the next level of learning for individuals seeking to amplify their impact. These certificates are designed around key areas necessary for a neighborhood organization's success. The first certificate launched in 2018, is neighborhood strategic planning, governance, and meeting facilitation. We offer neighborhood organizations the option of center staff coming to their neighborhoods to provide customized neighborhood-based training events. Additionally, our leadership development specialist and executive director meet regularly with individual neighborhood leaders to advise and train for more effective service.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 65% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 total spending goes to programs and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 17
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 56.4%; rating input score 56
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1.96 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 22; 22nd 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -108.1%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.79; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.14; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 62.5%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3% per year; rating input score 0; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -10.3% per year; rating input score 0; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -7.5% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 56.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $77K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $85K · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 56/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 22/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 17/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 24/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 13/100.