East Akron Neighborhood Development Corporation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 341365690
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Akron, OH, USA
- Phone
- 3307736838
- Rating
- 62
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Home Improvement and Repairs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $3,123,202
- Expenses
- $3,622,328
- Assets
- $39,050,737
- Liabilities
- $20,867,714
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
17 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- CHERYL STEPHENS (PRESIDENT/CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- CHERYL STEPHENS (PRESIDENT/CEO): $212,034 total reported compensation
- TAMMARA HUMBERT (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $137,100 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
See schedule o
What it reported doing in 2024
Community building and engagement. Eandc provides outreach programs and events, utilizing open dialogue and fostering diverse voices to contribute to shaping outcomes, often in coordination with local individuals, stakeholders, and service agencies, to engage in community discussions, decision-making, and activities that impact their collective well-being. The aim is to build trust, foster collaboration, and create solutions that benefit the community and the residents of the neighborhoods that eandc serves. The goal is to empower individuals and groups to play an active role in shaping the decisions and actions that affect their communities and with eandc creating these connections, work to drive positive social change, improve services, and promote long-term sustainability within the community.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 63% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- 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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 52
- Transparency & Controls: 65
- Accountability: 96
- Sustainability: 37
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 63.5%; rating input score 63
- Program expense ratio: 52.4%; rating input score 52
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- 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: Scored; rating input score 0
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -16%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 10.78; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.53; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 9.6%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -7.6% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -4.3% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 63.5% of revenue deployed · 52.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 15 of 16 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.9M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $212K · 17 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, executive pay, and related organizations
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 46 filed related-organization links
- 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: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 52/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 19/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.