United North Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
208567856
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017
Location
Toledo, OH, USA
Phone
4192558406
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Economic Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$754,940
Expenses
$715,688
Assets
$9,080,431
Liabilities
$2,634,612

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TOM JESIONOWSKI (PRESIDENT)
  • CATHY SCHULTZ (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • STEVEN SEATON (FORMER - CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • STEVEN SEATON (FORMER - CEO): $11,251 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To channel the synergy of collective north toledo neighborhoods and create the avenue needed to stabilize, stimulate, rebuild, grow and organize.

What it reported doing in 2017

United north will increase housing capacity through the acquisition and rehabilitation of housing for resale to low income individuals. Loans are at reduced rates to facilitate acquisition of housing. The organization facilitates this program by utilizing the following resources: a revolving loan fund provides loans to low and moderate wage earners at below market rates of interest, allowing for the purchase of rehabilitated properties. The city of toledo grants community development block grants to the organization for neighborhood development in deteriorating areas and to cover operating expenses. The microenterprise loan program has been established to assist small business owners in the "polish village" area in toledo to attain financing for rehabilitation and purchase of new businesses.

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 available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The required major-donor schedule is missing or incomplete and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 64
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 71.4%; rating input score 71
  • Program expense ratio: 71.9%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: $50.69 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: No; rating input score 0
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 5.2%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 12.69; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.29; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.5%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -15.6% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -13.6% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 71.4% of revenue deployed · 71.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $515K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $11K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2010 to 2017
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 21 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 — Transparency & Controls: Major donor itemization scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 54/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 30/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.