Cleveland Development Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN: 346528498
IRS 990 coverage: 2010–2024
Forms available: Form 990 2024
Location: Cleveland, OH, USA
Phone: 2166213300
Rating: 76
Verdict: SUPPORTED
Rating confidence: Moderate
Sector: Community, Neighborhood Development

Reported finances

Revenue: $35,053
Expenses: $62,062
Assets: $405,423
Liabilities: $385,820

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

29 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

Shah Baiju (President & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

Shah Baiju (President & CEO): $746,264 total reported compensation
Ittu Yvette (EVP Finance & Operations): $441,740 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Developing and improving Cleveland Ohio's civic visions.

What it reported doing in 2024

Educating local officials and business members on Federal Public Policy. In June, the Cleveland Development Foundation, through its parent organization, Greater Cleveland Partnership, hosted more than 100 local leaders for its annual Washington, D.C. Fly-In. Held in collaboration with regional mayoral associations, the Empowering Local Leadership conference convened elected officials, business leaders, and civic partners to strengthen connections with federal policymakers. Participants engaged in policy briefings at the White House and Capitol Hill, met with Members of Congress and agency officials, and explored opportunities to align local priorities with federal resources. The event concluded with a bipartisan reception recognizing the support of Ohio's Members of Congress.

Operating model

Revenue model: Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

Financial Efficiency: 87
Transparency & Controls: 64
Accountability: 91
Sustainability: 28
Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
Program expense ratio: 93.3%; rating input score 93
Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 18th percentile among comparable filings
Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

Operating margin: -77.1%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.53; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.95; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
Officer compensation ratio: 144.3%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

Program expense growth: -4% per year; rating input score 0; 40th percentile among comparable filings
Revenue growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
Asset growth: -0.2% per year; rating input score 0; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Details

Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 93.3% of spending went to programs
Governance: 25 of 25 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $58K in reported program spending
Leadership: top reported pay $746K · 29 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
Contacts: How to reach this organization
Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
Related organizations: 3 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.

High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 24/100.
High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 54/100.
High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.
High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.