Ibero-american Development Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
161303858
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Rochester, NY, USA
Phone
5854676410
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Development, Construction, Management

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,308,167
Expenses
$1,386,328
Assets
$6,303,792
Liabilities
$3,273,662

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANGELICA PEREZ-DELGADO (PRES & CEO IAAL)
  • EUGENIO MARLIN (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANGELICA PEREZ-DELGADO (PRES & CEO IAAL): $162,046 total reported compensation
  • EUGENIO MARLIN (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT): $127,377 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The ibero-american development corporation was incorporated to alleviate the hardship and distress of persons and families of low and moderate income residing in the rochester, ny area by providing dwelling accommodations and social and recreational facilities and to maintain and manage real property for various non-profit entities. In addition, the ibero-american development corporation identifies, refurbishes or builds, and markets homes with other third-parties to eligible purchases in the rochester, ny area.

What it reported doing in 2025

Development/rental of facilities to nonprofit organizations, development and rehabilitation of affordable housing for low-to-moderate income and management of hud properties serving developmentally disabled and elderly individuals.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 74% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work 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 revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 98.3%; rating input score 98
  • Program expense ratio: 92.7%; rating input score 93
  • 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: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -6%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.55; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.52; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.9%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.2% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.3% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 98.3% of revenue deployed · 92.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $162K · 8 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2017 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: 21 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.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 18/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 11/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 53/100.