Downtown Riverfront Trust

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
814619812
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Omaha, NE, USA
Phone
4023913190
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution

Reported finances

Revenue
$398,352
Expenses
$516,036
Assets
$13,622,822
Liabilities
$13,309,116

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RACHEL JACOBSON (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • KENNETH STINSON (CHAIRMAN)
  • MOGENS C BAY (DIRECTOR)
  • W GARY GATES (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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Downtown riverfront trust, in collaboration with the city of omaha, the metropolitan entertainment & convention authority (meca) and a riverfront revitalization committee have assumed responsibility for the planning, design and construction of the new tri-park complex on three city of omaha owned properties currently referred to as lewis and clark landing, heartland of america park and gene leahy mall. Drt is responsible for securing private donations from the community to fund a portion of the development. Meca is responsible for paying project expenses as well as activating, operating and maintaining the development. Due to this relationship, almost all funds raised by drt relating to this project are shown as a grants expense and contributions payable to meca.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 93% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 98.6%; rating input score 99
  • Program expense ratio: 76%; rating input score 76
  • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -29.5%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 26.4; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.98; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -45.8% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -45.8% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -18.6% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 98.6% of revenue deployed · 76% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $392K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 5/100.