Low Impact Development Center Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
522138076
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Beltsville, MD, USA
Phone
3019825559
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
General Science

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,462,048
Expenses
$3,168,584
Assets
$1,646,401
Liabilities
$361,581

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Neil Weinstein (Former Executive Director)
  • STEVE ROY (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • EMILY CLIFTON (Exec. Director): $230,112 total reported compensation
  • Neil Weinstein (Former Executive Director): $203,806 total reported compensation
  • DAVID MILLER (DIRECTOR ENGINEER): $178,974 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Non-profit organization dedicated to helping communities adopt innovative stormwater management practices and sustainable infrastructure solutions that protect public health and the environment

What it reported doing in 2024

The lid center is under a multi-year contract to assist prince georges county, md, meet its stormwater permit, chesapeake bay watershed, and related stormwater and community goals and requirements. The five project areas are: municipal npdes support; municipal and county npdes property management, swppp, and good housekeeping support; green infrastructure contractor training; technical planning, design, and outreach support; and grant management support services for stormwater and flood management projects associated with dam safety, water quality, water quantity, and community livability.

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 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 - 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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 52
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 57.1%; rating input score 57
  • Program expense ratio: 62.4%; rating input score 62
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 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: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8.5%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.52; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.22; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 24.2%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.3% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 57.1% of revenue deployed · 62.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 10 filed program accomplishments · $2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $230K · 8 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $813K reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 57/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 42/100.