Improved Solutions for Urban Systems

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
311355466
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2011
Forms available
Form 990 2011
Location
Dayton, OH, USA
Phone
9372232323
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Research Institutes and Public Policy Analysis

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,191,002
Expenses
$1,862,063
Assets
$6,571,058
Liabilities
$6,316,919

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2011. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2011. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To research and develop more effective ways to deliver services, to demonstrate non-convential approaches to solving problems related to econcomic development and self-sufficiency, and to assess the effectiveness of the methods and their applications to other systems and services.

What it reported doing in 2011

To research, develop and demonstrate innovative approaches to solving problems related to a lack of economic development and self-sufficiency.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 60th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -56.3%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.53; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.96; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.2%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -20.5% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.6% per year; rating input score 0; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $133K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2009 to 2011
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.

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.

  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 9/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 34/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.