New Hampshire Credit Union League
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 020263819
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2014
- Forms available
- Form 990 2014
- Location
- Manchester, NH, USA
- Phone
- 5084816755
- Rating confidence
- Limited
- Sector
- Credit Unions
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $476,532
- Expenses
- $551,251
- Assets
- $0
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
15 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- PAUL C GENTILE (PRESIDENT)
- DANIEL F EGAN JR (FORMER PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- PAUL C GENTILE (PRESIDENT): $443,217 total reported compensation
- PAUL E MAYER (SENIOR VP OF FINANCIAL AFF): $171,604 total reported compensation
- MARY ANN B CLANCY (SENIOR VP OF GENERAL COUNS): $169,880 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The league's mission is focused on helping its member credit unions meet the financial needs of the people of New Hampshire. Guided by it volunteer board of directors, the league seeks to accomplish this mission by providing legislative and public advocacy, education and training, product development and operational support. The league also is the primary means through which credit unions share resources and ideas in keeping with the cooperative nature of the credit union movement. The league actively supports and encourages credit unions in their community outreach efforts. In support of those efforts, the league maintains a committee on social responsibility. The purpose of that committee is to develop a unified plan of social responsibility for the league through recommendations to the league's board of directors.
What it reported doing in 2014
Managerial, financial, and educational support of approximately 22 New Hampshire credit unions.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Membership-supported. 67% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
- 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
- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
- Transparency & Controls: 77
- Accountability: 77
- Sustainability: 9
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: Limited
- Program expense ratio: Limited
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- 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 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- 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: -15.7%; rating input score 15; 15th 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: 27%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: -4.5% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -25.2% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
- Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $443K · 15 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2010 to 2014
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Related organizations: 4 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.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.