Thrive Community Lending Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
933283822
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2022
Location
Atlanta, GA, USA
Phone
4706431946
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$264,133
Expenses
$142,244
Assets
$431,541
Liabilities
$240,545

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN ARNOLD (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOHN MOELLER (Member, Inspiritus Inc): $305,660 total reported compensation
  • AIMEE ZANGANDOU (VICE CHAIR): $160,168 total reported compensation
  • JOHN ARNOLD (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $104,511 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Thrive Community Lending is an emerging Community Development Financial Institution (CDFI) dedicated to expanding economic opportunity for low-income people and legal immigrants. We provide affordable capital paired with no-cost business services to help low-income entrepreneurs start, sustain, and grow small businesses. By investing in people who often face barriers to access traditional finance, Thrive empowers entrepreneurs to build financial stability, create wealth, and strengthen their communities.

What it reported doing in 2024

See schedule o for complete description of program service accomplishment.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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 - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. 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: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 64
  • Accountability: 72
  • Sustainability: 64
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 48.6%; rating input score 49
  • Program expense ratio: 87.4%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $29.89 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 22nd 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: 60%; rating input score 60; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 46.1%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.03; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.56; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 110.1%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 26% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 44.6% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 48.6% of revenue deployed · 87.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $124K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $306K · 8 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 49/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D revenue reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 10/100.