Delmar Main Street Initiative

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
872802434
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-PF 2022
Location
Saint Louis, MO, USA
Phone
3143939437
Rating
41
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Economic Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$292,982
Expenses
$163,075
Assets
$174,827
Liabilities
$1,272

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • FELICE MCCLENDON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • TONNIE GLISPIE-SMITH (President)
  • LISA POTTS (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • FELICE MCCLENDON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $73,729 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Our Mission is to create people centered places, stimulate entrepreneurship, and promote equitable development by utilizing the Main Street Approach - reimagining Delmar as a unified, equitably developed, vibrant, economically viable commercial corridor where entrepreneurs thrive.

What it reported doing in 2024

Mission is to foster sustainable economic development along the Delmar commercial corridor. In 2024, hired first Executive Director, launched a Public Arts Initiative, advanced from Affiliate to Associate tier in the Missouri Main Street network, recognized as a Small Business Navigator and helped launch the SupplySTL portal, and hosted several community events supporting local businesses.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% 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.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 24
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 61
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 21.1%; rating input score 21
  • Program expense ratio: 36.7%; rating input score 37
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 9th 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 44.3%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.07; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 45.2%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 103.1% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 120.1% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 21.1% of revenue deployed · 36.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 14 board members independent · 0 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $60K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $74K · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 21/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 37/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 7 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 42/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.