Center for Opportunity Urbanism

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
472241225
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2021
Forms available
Form 990 2021, Form 990-N 2015
Location
Houston, TX, USA
Phone
8132916001
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Urban, Community Economic Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$311,000
Expenses
$322,906
Assets
$46,673
Liabilities
$8,548

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOEL KOTKIN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOEL KOTKIN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $97,500 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Center for opportunity urbanism exists to promote approaches that enable cities to drive opportunities for the bulk of their citizens.

What it reported doing in 2021

The center for opportunity urbanism (cou) examines issues of upward mobility, growth and prosperity for all citizens with particular interest in how planning and zoning decisions can hamper or spark economic growth. Cou's work focuses on key demographic concerns, notably around the critical issue of families, who generally seek out housing that is both affordable and spacious enough to raise children. And governance - the question of who makes decisions about the commons - will also be a key area of exploration. An approach that focuses on good schools, good parks, decent jobs and strong neighborhoods may not thrill many architects, pundits and planners - who almost invariably favor ever-denser development - but they do matter to most people who live in urban areas. In 2020, cou published major studies on "upward mobility in the united states and "the demographia international housing affordability index" sponsored virtual events on "opportunity and upward mobility for the middle class and produced commentaries on economic growth, gentrification, demographics. Upward mobility, and affordability.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 95% 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: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 18
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 88%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 84.8%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 22nd 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: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -3.8%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.14; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.18; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 30.2%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -7.5% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -6% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.7% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 88% of revenue deployed · 84.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 6 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $274K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $98K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2015 to 2021
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 25/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.