Eastside Community Development Corporation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521933648
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Baltimore, MD, USA
Phone
4102849861
Rating
62
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$304,518
Expenses
$202,818
Assets
$240,606
Liabilities
$45,774

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • RICK DAVIS (EXECUTIVE DI): $60,985 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The organization is a hud certified non-profit housing counseling agency committed to the availability of affordable housing in eastern baltimore county and recognizes the importance of preserving and promoting the viability and stability of older neighborhoods through homeownership. The organization offers free foreclosure prevention counseling in connection with baltimore county and the state of Maryland; homebuyers' education and counseling for the baltimore county settlement expense loan program; assists first time homebuyers in baltimore county obtain up to 10,000 in closing cost and downpayment assistance in conjunction with the american dream downpayment initiative; and education and counseling for cda; dselp, persons with disabilities loan program, fha financing and other lender- required counseling.

What it reported doing in 2016

Assisted homeowners with foreclosure mitigation counseling and legal services; offer homebuyers' education and counseling for the baltimore county settlement expense loan program; assist first time homebuyers in baltimore county obtain up to 10,000 in closing cost and downpayment assistance in conjunction with the american dream downpayment initiative; provide education and counseling for cda, dselp, persons with disabilities loan program, fha financing, and other lender-required counseling.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 100% 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 revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 52
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 50
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 44.7%; rating input score 45
  • Program expense ratio: 67.2%; rating input score 67
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.54 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 33.4%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.19; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.19; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 30.1%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -7.7% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2% per year; rating input score 0; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 44.7% of revenue deployed · 67.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 3 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $136K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $61K · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2010 to 2016
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 45/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 46/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 48/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.