Neighborhood Improvement Development Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237380888
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Milwaukee, WI, USA
Phone
4142865608
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$171,748
Expenses
$255,280
Assets
$3,592,477
Liabilities
$715,791

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • MILELE COGGS (BOARD MEMBER): $86,137 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 neighborhood improvement development corporation (the corporation) is a nonprofit corporation established by the city of milwaukee, Wisconsin (the city), to promote reinvestment in both housing and commercial structures within the city. The corporation's programs encourage private lending institutions and property owners to make improvements to the community's homes and businesses. The corporation is managed by a board of directors made up of members from the public and private sectors. The city of milwaukee includes the corporation as a component unit enterprise fund in its comprehensive annual financial report. This component unit designation is based on the oversight responsibilities and financial accountability of the city in connection with the grant programs administered by the corporation.

What it reported doing in 2024

Housing production - all expenses related to the rehabilitation and resale of houses in low-income areas to low-income individuals who otherwise would likely not qualify for bank financing.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 79% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 98.3%; rating input score 98
  • Program expense ratio: 71.8%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 38.2%; rating input score 38; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -48.6%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 14.07; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.2; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: Limited

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -10.1% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -18% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -3.2% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 98.3% of revenue deployed · 71.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 8 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $183K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $86K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 3 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.

  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 38/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.