Council for Quality Growth Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
581664710
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Atlanta, GA, USA
Phone
7709519749
Rating confidence
Limited

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,758,539
Expenses
$1,847,050
Assets
$1,429,234
Liabilities
$1,038,860

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

Leadership & pay

99 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHAEL PARIS (PRESIDENT & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • MICHAEL PARIS (PRESIDENT & CEO): $374,707 total reported compensation
  • JOSEPH SANTORO (DIRECTOR, POLICY & GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS): $137,295 total reported compensation
  • MEGAN KING (DIRECTOR, PROGRAMS AND EVENTS): $105,452 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The council of quality growth's objective is to promote quality growth in the metro-atlanta area through a variety of programs; including educating members, providing a forum for information exchange, and promoting an understanding of growth issues by members, the public, and policy makers.

What it reported doing in 2024

The council for quality growth promotes balanced and responsible growth through the platforms of advocacy, information and education. The council addresses strategic economic development, planning and infrastructure needs as well as tough quality of life issues. The council is proactively involved in the formulation of policy and legislation critical to economic development and represents its members on local, regional, state and federal issues. Working with regional and legislative partners, we will achieve economic success for Georgia for generations to come.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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.

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: 62
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

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

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 23%; rating input score 23; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -5%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.77; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.73; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 31.6%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.1% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 96 of 96 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $375K · 99 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 14 of 15 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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: Grant itemization coverage scored 23/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 24/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 10/100.