Camden Empowerment Zone Corpo

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521989338
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2010
Forms available
Form 990 2010
Location
Camden, NJ, USA
Phone
8563659061
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Economic Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$476,284
Expenses
$633,263
Assets
$3,934,020
Liabilities
$427,865

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2010. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2010. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To facilitate community devlopment and neighborhood revitaliation that stimulate sustainable economic development for residents and enterprises of camden

What it reported doing in 2010

To stimulate social and economic development, we issue grants in the

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 85% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 73
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 63.6%; rating input score 64; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 93.2%; rating input score 93; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -33%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.21; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.1%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $195K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $96K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 26 current checks pass · 4 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 filed related-organization links
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D expense reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D land buildings reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 29/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 39/100.