Social Enterprise Institute USA

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
300604904
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-T 2023, Form 990-N 2018
Location
Elizabethtown, PA, USA
Phone
7174222080
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,953,819
Expenses
$1,119,142
Assets
$1,037,861
Liabilities
$335,490

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JAMES REEB (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • MICHELE SMITH (Treasurer): $14,762 total reported compensation
  • JAMES REEB (President): $7,200 total reported compensation
  • JAMES FREDERICK (COO): $7,200 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Social enterprise institute of USA acts as an organizational development andtechnical advisor, primarily focusing on helping nonprofits build or acquirefor-profit subsidiaries to grow program service revenue funding source. The organization provides financial advising services through its wholly owned subsidiary, the social impact funding benefit corporation (sifb). Note the social impact funding benefit corporation (sifb) was transferred as a wholly owned subsidiary under social impact properties (sip) on january 1, 2021

What it reported doing in 2024

In 2023, Social Enterprise Group (SEG) pivoted its focus from primarily supporting nonprofits in developing social enterprises, and expanding their revenue models, to establishing itself as a community development organization. Our emphasis shifted to aiding organizations with successful programs that address the Social Determinants of Health, helping them expand their programs and facilities to maximize their social impact. To support this strategic shift, we developed three distinctive programs: Expansion Planning, Fiscal Sponsorship, and Land Banking. These service programs are essential to enabling nonprofits, for-profits, and quasi-governmental agencies to achieve their goals of impact maximization. We have discontinued all activities that are not supporting these programs. This strategic shift in focus and service program development is responsive to the markets need for specialized Program Expansion services. As a result of this change, 2024 has already shown a substantial increase in revenue and strong market momentum. Client results and referrals have underscored the success of our new approach, with steady growth in engagements across each of SEGs refined service program areas: Expansion Planning, Fiscal Sponsorship, and Land Banking. While our missionhelping those who help othersremains the same, our methods and the types of organizations we serve have evolved. This strategic shift reflects a deeper understanding of SEG's value, as we leverage our teams skills, experience, and organizational structure to maximize our clients socioeconomic impact.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 62% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 59
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 40
  • Sustainability: 64
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 52.4%; rating input score 52
  • Program expense ratio: 91.5%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 20%; rating input score 20; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 42.7%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.93; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.32; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.2%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 33.6% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 16.5% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 52.4% of revenue deployed · 91.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 10 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $15K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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 52/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 20/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 40/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.