Miami Township Community Improvement Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
205183155
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Miamisburg, OH, USA
Phone
9374339969
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Economic Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$46,329
Expenses
$23,810
Assets
$1,079,478
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DOUG BARRY (PRESIDENT)
  • ALEX CARLSON (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • DOUG BARRY (PRESIDENT)
  • CHRIS SNYDER (DIRECTOR)
  • CLAY MCCORD (TREASURER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

To advance, encourage and promote industrial, economic, commercial and civic development within miami township, montgomery county, Ohio.

What it reported doing in 2024

To advance, encourage and promote industrial, economic, commercial and civic development within miami township, montgomery county, Ohio.advance to the township to cover the first state infrastructure bank loan the township obtained to deliver the vienna parkway extension and facilitate the vienna springs development. The cic serves as a back stop for the township until the real estate and payroll tax collections are sufficient to service the debt. Timing of collections creates an initial gap, but repayment from the township is not a concern.lot preparations in anticipaton of sale, final piece of the vienna center project north of the road extension and elder-care facility are two parcels readied for development. These will be marketed for sale with the proceeds funding future cic projects.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 44
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 83
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 36.7%; rating input score 37
  • Program expense ratio: 71.4%; rating input score 71
  • 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 48.6%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 45.34; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -43.4% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3.9% per year; rating input score 0; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.1% per year; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 36.7% of revenue deployed · 71.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $17K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 11 of 11 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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: Mission deployment rate scored 37/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.