Itngreatercincinnati
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 271442201
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2015
- Forms available
- Form 990 2015
- Location
- Cincinnati, OH, USA
- Phone
- 5135592200
- Rating
- 78
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Transportation Assistance
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $60,586
- Expenses
- $95,168
- Assets
- $0
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- NANCY SCHUSTER (EXECUTIVE DI): $77,233 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Itngreatercincinnati's purpose is to provide a community based, community supported economically viable and consumer-oriented quality transportation service for seniors and visually impaired adults.
What it reported doing in 2015
The ability to go from one place to another is something that many of us take for granted. We simply get in our cars and drive there. But for hundreds of adults with visual impairments and seniors who are physically no longer able to drive, driving is impossible. They can quickly become isolated, depressed, and malnourished without access to social events, employment, the grocery store and health care. And, unfortunately, the isolation of these individuals often goes nearly unnoticed in our community. Itngreatercincinnati (itngc) helps to break that isolation.all program components, from the use of personal vehicles, to the friendly door-through-door service, are designed to maintain member dignity and provide a positive experience while facilitating access to the doctor's office, the grocery store, volunteer opportunities, social outings, and a range of other transportation needs. Itngreatercincinnati has been recognized by the national organization, itnamerica, for the high percentage of rides provided by our trained and bonded volunteer drivers using their own private vehicles, as well as its operational efficiency.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 67% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 94% 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 the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 85
- Transparency & Controls: 90
- Accountability: 84
- Sustainability: 13
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 73.9%; rating input score 74
- Fundraising efficiency: $5.69 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: NotApplicable
- 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: -57.1%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 81.2%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -102% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -112.6% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -200% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 73.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $70K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $77K · 6 people listed
- Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2014 to 2015
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 41/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 26/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.