Woodlawn Development Associates

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
363974656
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2018
Forms available
Form 990 2018
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
7736437495
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$95,269
Expenses
$82,244
Assets
$757,694
Liabilities
$784,938

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Dominic Surya (President)
  • Vincent Cole (Vice President, Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • Stephen Alexander (Board member)
  • Andrew Carter (Board member)
  • Dan Hunter-Smith (Board member)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Supporting affordable housing in Woodlawn

What it reported doing in 2018

Woodlawn Cohousing Community - to provide affordable cohousing that promotes cooperative relationships among tenants and a children-friendly environment.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 91% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 74.7%; rating input score 75
  • Program expense ratio: 86.3%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 19th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 13.7%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 9.21; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.04; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.2% per year; rating input score 0; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -5.6% per year; rating input score 0; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 74.7% of revenue deployed · 86.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $71K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 40 of 41 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2010 to 2018
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 5/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.