Renaissance Development Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
383367429
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Benton Harbor, MI, USA
Phone
2699256100
Rating
56
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Urban, Community Economic Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,043,562
Expenses
$4,235,545
Assets
$17,295,436
Liabilities
$28,024,804

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARLA SCHNEIDER (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHRIS COOK (TREASURER): $273,714 total reported compensation
  • MARLA SCHNEIDER (PRESIDENT): $220,790 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The organization, partnering with the cornerstone alliance, engages in the development of economic growth for the cities of benton harbor and st. Joseph and the townships of benton, lincoln, and royalton.

What it reported doing in 2025

Renaissance development fund is engaged in the development and implementation of economic growth for the cities of benton harbor, Michigan and st. Jospeh, Michigan; the charter townships of benton, st. Joseph, and lincoln; and the township of royalton. The organization's principal purpose is to foster redevelopment and revitalization of blighted real property and the remediation of environmental contamination, and to sponsor as well as fund programs that will help the disadvantaged in these cities.in connection with its mission to develop and implement economic growth in its service area, the organization provides loans to local small business owners. These notes receivables are periodically evaluated for collectability based on past credit history with customers and their current financial condition. Provisions for losses on notes receivable are determined on the basis of loss experience, known and inherent risks in the loans held, the estimated value of underlying collateral, if any, and current economic conditions.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 83% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
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

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

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 50
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 55.1%; rating input score 55
  • Program expense ratio: 57%; rating input score 57
  • 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -107.3%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.08; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.62; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.9%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -7.9% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -10.5% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -9.6% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 55.1% of revenue deployed · 57% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $274K · 5 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 55/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 57/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.