Downtown Morgan Hill Improvement District

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
883740933
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2023
Location
Morgan Hill, CA, USA
Phone
4083104623
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$287,759
Expenses
$200,608
Assets
$258,537
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

People named in this filing

  • CHRIS GHIONE (Director)
  • FRANK LEAL (Director)
  • HONNIE MURPHY (Director)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The goal of the Downtown Morgan Hill Improvement District is to maintain the Downtown District as a safe and inviting environment, attract more tenants and shoppers, increase property values, and stabilize occupancy. The company will provide Clean and Safe programs, Capital Improvements, Art Installations, Marketing, Special Events, and related Management and Administration directly and only to assessed parcels within the Downtown boundary. This entity will have the ability to leverage parcel owners investment with additional public investment to provide the financial resources necessary to develop and implement a focused strategy to support existing and future businesses and patrons in Downtown Morgan Hill.

What it reported doing in 2025

Pursuant to an agreement with the City of Morgan Hill, the Downtown Morgan Hill Improvement District was formed for the sole purpose of improving downtown Morgan Hill. Annual work plans and budgets are developed by a board composed of stakeholders that own property in downtown Morgan Hill. Improvements and activities provided are subject to private sector performance standards, controls, and accountability.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 93% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 69
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69.4%; rating input score 69
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 30.3%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.29; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.1% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 75% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 45.9% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 69.4% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 9 board members independent · 0 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 48/100.