Hartford City Main Street

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
824544999
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2019–2019
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2019
Location
Hartford City, IN, USA
Phone
7653481720
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,600
Expenses
$3,665
Assets
$13,896
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Ron Branson (President)
  • Marvin Miller (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Ron Branson (President)
  • Marvin Miller (Vice President)
  • Michele Risinger (Treasurer)

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

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Encourage, foster, and stimulate the preservation of Hartford City, Indiana. To acquaint and to inform the public about the unique architectural heritage represented in Hartford City and about appropriate methods for the rehabilitation of historic buildings. To encourage the improvement and better maintenance of property in Hartford City. To promote community pride and civic interest. To provide education for community leaders and business people about the historic aspects and to encourage the retention and renovation of the structures so as to preserve the historic nature of the downtown area. To combat the economic causes of community deterioration by acquainting and educating local businesses about progressive business practicies.

What it reported doing in 2019

Encourage the preservation of historic buildings in the downtown historic district by working with City of Hartford City to create historic preservation ordinance. Hired Indiana Landmarks to help craft the ordinance ($3,000 fee split between 5 organizations; County Council paid Main Street instead of the City of Hartford City, so we passed on that $600 and our $600 to the City.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 52% for direct work, 43% for grants, and 5% for member benefits.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration and the available information about grant readiness automatic revocation leaves an important question unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 73
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75.5%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 94.8%; rating input score 95

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 20.3%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.79; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 75.5% of revenue deployed · 94.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $3K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • 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.

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

  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.