North Lawndale Catalyst Initiative Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
991319295
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
2026185012
Rating
62
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Economic Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,031,756
Expenses
$299,863
Assets
$18,326,655
Liabilities
$17,594,762

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • REGINALD JONES (MANAGING DIRECTOR): $250,457 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 north lawndale catalyst initiative, inc. (the "charity") is organized and operated for charitable purposes. Specifically, the charity will pursue a place based economic development strategy in north lawndale, chicago designed to combat historic disinvestment and structural inequities. The charity's long-term objectives include revitalizing infrastructure, creating significant living wage jobs in the community, attracting businesses to the community, increasing quality affordable housing stock, and preventing violence.

What it reported doing in 2024

In its first year of operation, nlci acted as landlord/operator for the fillmore center, a multi-tenant light manufacturing facility. Nlci performed property management for several stand alone commercial properties in north lawndale. Nlci is a business advisor and underwriter to north lawndale area entrepreneurs in growth stages of their businesses. Nlci is a catalyst for placemaking artwork in key areas within north lawndale.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 72% for direct work, and 28% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 51
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 75
  • Sustainability: 75
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 31.2%; rating input score 31
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • 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: 70.9%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 61.12; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.96; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: Limited

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 31.2% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 8 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $300K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $250K · 8 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 31/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 6/100.