SENA - Standish Ericsson Neighborhood Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
411735421
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Minneapolis, MN, USA
Phone
6122003421
Rating
54
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Coalitions

Reported finances

Revenue
$54,161
Expenses
$48,474
Assets
$74,516
Liabilities
$18,889

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Brynn Kasper (Board President)
  • Ash Tifa (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Brynn Kasper (Board President)
  • Ash Tifa (Vice President)
  • Sheila Cracraft Fehler (Treasurer)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Support the vitality of our neighborhoods by building on our communitys strengths and advocating for our residents and community partners.

What it reported doing in 2025

Serve as the official connection for the City of Minneapolis to implement neighborhoods 2020 identified prioritiesFacilitate community meetings, engage residents in community issues, coordinate events, engage residentsin green partner activities and respond to the needs of all 10,000 neighborhood residents

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 87% 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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 20
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 54
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 19.1%; rating input score 19
  • Program expense ratio: 21.3%; rating input score 21

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 10.5%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.54; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.25; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -24.2% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 19.1% of revenue deployed · 21.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $10K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 19/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 21/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 11/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.