Inwood Merchant Association Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
843395768
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2022
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
6462490263
Rating
41
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$574,756
Expenses
$607,782
Assets
$121,986
Liabilities
$133,477

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • GWENDOLYNE MARTINEZ (EXECUTIVE DI): $89,103 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The inwood merchant associations mission is to fortify the fabric of inwoods business community through preservation, education, and advocacy. We are committed to fostering business expansion and community development by implementing robust economic programs that increase the income potential of all businesses within our jurisdiction. Committed to enhancing the community's social, cultural, and civic vitality, we champion initiatives aimed at enhancing inwood's functional and aesthetic appeal, thereby fostering a dynamic, prosperous environment in which every business can flourish.

What it reported doing in 2024

As part of the inwood merchant association's ("ima")ongoing commitment to improving the commercial environment and supporting local economic activity, ima provided street and sidewalk cleaning services along dyckman's street primary business corridors. Key accomplishments of the program include: provided consistent litter and debris removal along high- traffic commercial zones, contributing to improved cleanliness, safety, and visual appeal. Supported the maintenance of public-facing areas that serve over 150 small business, enhancing customer experience and merchant satisfaction. Assisted ima in meeting it's neighborhood beautification and community improvement goals, aligining with broarder efforts to attract foot traffic and improve quality of life for residents and visitors. Responded to cleaning needs tied to special events and high-volume days, demonstrating flexibility and dedication to community standards.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 100% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 63
  • Sustainability: 17
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • 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: -5.7%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.2; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.09; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.7%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -200% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -52.6% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -144% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $608K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $89K · 10 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $146K reported
  • Consistency: 10 of 11 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 5/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.