Social Enterprise Properties

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
851071575
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2022, Form 990-N 2020
Location
Lancaster, PA, USA
Phone
7179997997
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Real Estate Associations

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,111,280
Expenses
$188,185
Assets
$3,261,147
Liabilities
$2,242,487

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JAMES REEB (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JAMES REEB (PRESIDENT): $7,200 total reported compensation
  • JIM FREDERICK (COO): $7,200 total reported compensation
  • EMMA DANAE DROZ (SECRETARY (THRU 4/19/24)): $6,966 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 properties provides research and education regarding social purposed real estate development, directly or indirectly conduct, support, provide supporting resources, and/or provide financial intermediary or fiscal sponsorship services. Sep provides a land banking program acting as a principal through wholly-owned entities; and facilitate the acquisition and/or development of facilities supporting social enterprises, community benefit and related organizations addressing the social determinants of health in a community.

What it reported doing in 2024

Land and property banking services acquiring, owning, holding and selling real estate intended for future development assessing the social determinants of health through tax credit programs at a cost lower than that available to developers and accessing grants and other funding that developers otherwise cannot.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 80% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

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: 49
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 56
  • Sustainability: 75
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 15%; rating input score 15
  • Program expense ratio: 88.9%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: $682.17 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 40%; rating input score 40; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 83.1%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 17.33; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.69; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: Limited

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 37.3% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 108.5% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 97.7% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 15% of revenue deployed · 88.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $167K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $7K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 15/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 40/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 11/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.