Connected Dmv

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
850828769
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Mclean, VA, USA
Phone
7703310294
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,674,938
Expenses
$774,206
Assets
$1,095,064
Liabilities
$1,268,422

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STUART L SOLOMON (PRESIDENT/CEO- CHAIR)
  • JOHN YESAWICH (VICE PRESIDENT, FEDERAL GOVERNMENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOHN YESAWICH (VICE PRESIDENT, FEDERAL GOVERNMENT): $165,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Connected dmv's mission is to deliver regional initiatives together for a stronger and more equitable future.

What it reported doing in 2024

Connected dmv is initiatives-based and works with regional organizations across Washington d.c., Maryland, and Virginia - the dmv - to drive ongoing improvements to social, digital, and physical infrastructure. We focus on initiatives that span local jurisdictions and require public-private-academia-community collaboration to best achieve the dual objectives of enduring economic health and social equity. Three regional collaborations are the backbone of our strategy: * dmv regional congress * regional economic develoment strategy * we are greater Washington joint funding program office

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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 49
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 62
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 33%; rating input score 33
  • Program expense ratio: 71.5%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: $28.53 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • 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: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: 53.8%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.41; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.16; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 21.3%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 25.3% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 37.3% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 33% of revenue deployed · 71.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 12 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $553K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $165K · 16 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $279K reported
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 33/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 54/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.