Economic Development Catalyst Organization

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
203003718
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2013
Forms available
Form 990 2013
Location
Austin, TX, USA
Phone
9155395552
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public, Societal Benefit

Reported finances

Revenue
$414,252
Expenses
$164,679
Assets
$702,813
Liabilities
$106,550

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TEOFILO TIJERINA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • REBECCA Y GONZALES (DIRECTOR OF MARKETING): $2,200 total reported compensation
  • TEOFILO TIJERINA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $550 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To stimulate high value-added entrepreneurial ventures in historically disadvantaged or underdeveloped communities and regions and create access for these communities to high value economic development factors such as research and development, informal business networks, and relationships with multinational corporations.

What it reported doing in 2013

Secured grant from eda. The organization was organized and work to commence projects in alternative energys, medical devices, materials, and other business start up was conducted.created partnerships with various other exempt organzations to strategicly position the organization to realize regional projects.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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 a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 57
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 55
  • Sustainability: 76
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 34.8%; rating input score 35
  • Program expense ratio: 87.6%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: $33.28 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 73; 73rd 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: 50%; rating input score 50; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 60.2%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.27; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.15; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.7%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 39.2% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 34.8% of revenue deployed · 87.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 6 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $144K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $2K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2010 to 2013
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • 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 35/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 50/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 45/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.