Cincinnati Recycling and Reuse Hub
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 844850272
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2021–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2020
- Location
- Cincinnati, OH, USA
- Phone
- 5136299040
- Rating
- 79
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Recycling Programs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $631,952
- Expenses
- $736,443
- Assets
- $299,104
- Liabilities
- $16,099
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
13 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MAX KILB (PRESIDENT)
- ERIN FAY (VICE PRESIDENT)
- STEPHANIE CORNETT (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- CARRIE HARMS (WAREHOUSE DIRECTOR): $45,780 total reported compensation
- STEPHANIE CORNETT (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $35,308 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To increase the landfill diversion, recycling, and reuse rates of the greater cincinnati area. We do this to help mitigate the effects of climate change, which disproportionately affects communities of color around the world. We find ways to send "hard-to-recycle" items for recycling, and we find places for items to be reused. Many items go to other nonprofits, but we also have items available for free to the public for reuse.
What it reported doing in 2024
A. Beyond the bin recycling and reuse 39.3 tons of postconsumer plastic (including film/bags and rigid #2#7 and "no number" plastics) sent for recycling 4.8 tons of styrofoam sent for recycling 0.1 tons of shoes sent for reuse and recycling 5.7 tons of office/school supplies given away for reuse 5.9 tons of garden items given away for reuse 1.2 tons of tires sent for recycling 1.2 tons of packing materials (bubble wrap, air pillows, etc.) given away for reuse 2121 pounds of denim sent for recycling and over 150 tons of other items sent for recycling or reuse. We collect these "hard-to-recycle" items to help other nonprofits better fulfill their missions, to keep reusable items out of the landfill, and to decrease the amount of resources (energy, water, etc.) needed to create new items. The fewer resources we need to create new items, the less greenhouse gases are created. This will help lessen the worst effects of climate change, which disproportionately affects communities of color in the us and around the world.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 76% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 70
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 86
- Sustainability: 21
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 71.7%; rating input score 72
- Program expense ratio: 61.4%; rating input score 61
- Fundraising efficiency: $159.6 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
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: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -16.5%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.41; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 11%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 49.2% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 28.5% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 16.1% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 71.7% of revenue deployed · 61.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $452K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $46K · 13 people listed
- Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2021 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- 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.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 11/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 51/100.