Bricktown Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 731366261
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2018–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2019
- Location
- Oklahoma City, OK, USA
- Phone
- 4052353500
- Rating
- 57
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $240,244
- Expenses
- $207,389
- Assets
- $95,701
- Liabilities
- $36,220
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
18 people listed
People named in this filing
- DAVID SOUTHARD (VICE CHAIR)
- PAIGE SHEPHERD (DIRECTOR)
- BEN BYNUM (DIRECTOR)
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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Continuation of part I line 1, Bricktown is part of the downtown Business Improvement District, which is managed by Downtown OKC Partnership. The BID delivers street-level amenities, such as street cleaning and trash pickup, produces events, and provides additional services in Bricktown such as security, lighting, landscaping and cleaning.
What it reported doing in 2024
Bid programs - the association reprensent a geographical area of properties within the downtown business improvement district bid and as such, manages the bid program funds related to the bid contract between downtown Oklahoma city partnership and the city of okc. Bid funds are allocated and overseen by the corporation to further the mission of the organization and complement distriwide bid programming. Events and projects that occurred during the 2025 fiscal year are bricktown street master plan, police safety patrol program, canal wayfinding project.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 95% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 34
- Transparency & Controls: 80
- Accountability: 70
- Sustainability: 47
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 35.6%; rating input score 36
- Program expense ratio: 41.3%; rating input score 41
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 5th 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: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- 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: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 13.7%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.46; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.38; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -26.2% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 35.6% of revenue deployed · 41.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $86K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 18 people listed
- Consistency: 14 of 15 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 1 filed schedules
- Filing history: 6 filing years from 2018 to 2024
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 36/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 41/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 13/100.