Tivoli Non-profit Housing Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
454824004
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2014
Location
Warren, MI, USA
Phone
5867539002
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Senior Citizens' Housing/Retirement Communities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$28,162
Expenses
$127,638
Assets
$1,007,127
Liabilities
$6,434

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

Leadership & pay

23 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANNIE MITCHELL (PRESIDENT)
  • GLORIA PARRIS (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANNE SACKRISON (ASSISTANT SECRETARY): $352,300 total reported compensation
  • MEL HUDSON (NATIONAL CONSTRUCTION MANAGER): $258,188 total reported compensation
  • DIANE SMITH (NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT MANAGER): $247,688 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 provide housing facilities for low income senior citizens.

What it reported doing in 2024

Tivoli non-profit housing corporation is a Michigan non-profit housing corporation and organized on a non-stock basis by csi support & development services, a Michigan non-profit corporation. The corporation was formed to acquire and operate an apartment building consisting of 80 apartment units in warren, Michigan. Housing is provided to low income seniors in cooperation with the us department of housing and urban development.on 2/12/2014 tivoli manor ldha, lp purchased the project. Tivoli non-profit housing corporation now funds tivoli manor ldha, lp through a seller carryback loan and is the general partner of the aforementioned partnership. On a go forward basis, the main purpose of this entity will be a financing arm of the low income project alongside carrying out general partner duties.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% 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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -353.2%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.89; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 264.2%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -29.4% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -31.4% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -8.8% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $128K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $352K · 23 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 12 of 12 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 92 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 30/100.