Coney Island Development Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
134270717
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2011
Forms available
Form 990 2011
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2123124233
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$267,282
Expenses
$239,428
Assets
$425,030
Liabilities
$156,544

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2011. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2011. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Re-development of Coney Island community

What it reported doing in 2011

Re-development of coney island community by carrying on research for the purpose of aiding the coney island community of the city of New York by attracting new industry and commerce in the area and by encouraging the development and retention of industry therein. In addition to neighborhood promotion and marketing initiatives, cidc sponsored local events, provided support to coney island organizations and enhanced neighborhood conditions by providing supplementary street sanitation services. Cidc also worked with the operators of the amusement parks, local businesses, and local community leaders to actively recruit more than 500 positions for the new amusement parks in coney island.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 94% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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: 100
  • Accountability: 94
  • Sustainability: 61
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

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

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 60th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 86
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 10.4%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.78; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.37; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 75; 75th 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: 11 of 11 board members independent · 6 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $219K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 13 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.