Sugar Springs Property Owners Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 510135724
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Gladwin, MI, USA
- Phone
- 9894264111
- Rating
- 82
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $3,684,651
- Expenses
- $3,501,564
- Assets
- $5,917,675
- Liabilities
- $221,571
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- TOM HUG (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- MATT SCHINDLER (GM/TREASURER): $106,417 total reported compensation
- DAVID HARRIS (PART YEAR GM): $78,972 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To promote the health, safety and welfare of the residents within the boundaries of that certain real estate development situated in gladwin county, Michigan, commonly known as "sugar springs- and such additions therto as may hereafter be brought within the jurisdiction of this corporation by annexation, hereafter referred to as "the properties- and for this purpose to: (a) provide for the protection of the values, amenities and qualities in the development and for the maintenance, improvement, policing and preservation of common properties (grounds or open space, trails, recreational facilities and the like); (b) supplement municipal services; (c) fix assessments to be levied against the properties; (d) enforce any and all covenants, restrictions and agreements applicable to the properties; and, (e) pay taxes, if any, on the common properties; and, (f) insofar as permitted by law, to do any other thing that will promote the common benefit and enjoyment of the residents of the properti
What it reported doing in 2024
To maintain the buildings and grounds of the association for the convenience of the association's members and for the benefit of the general public.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 96% 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.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 71
- Transparency & Controls: 90
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 55
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 78%; rating input score 78
- Program expense ratio: 84%; rating input score 84
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 5%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.69; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 5.3%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 78% of revenue deployed · 84% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2.9M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $106K · 10 people listed
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $267K reported
- Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 50/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Whistleblower policy not reported.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 56/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 51/100.