Midtown Indianapolis Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
800228952
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-T 2025
Location
Indianapolis, IN, USA
Phone
3176003141
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Neighborhood, Block Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$304,551
Expenses
$318,249
Assets
$932,540
Liabilities
$598,908

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RACHEL DICKERSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • RACHEL DICKERSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $89,155 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Midtown indy exists to cultivate an equitable, healthy, and sustainable community in which stakeholders of all incomes, races, and ethnicities have access to the opportunities, services, and amenities they need to thrive. Specifically, midtown's work is focused on 1) building a sense of community; 2) support for community based and minority businesses and job skills development; 3) improvement of transportation options and the vitality of key commercial corridors and nodes; 4) improvement of housing options and public spaces.

What it reported doing in 2025

Community development and neighborhood initiatives: midtown indy advanced community development efforts to expand housing and strengthen commercial corridors within its service area. In 2025, the organization led progress on a key mixed-use development at 46th street and college avenue, a formerly vacant brownfield site, with a development agreement in place for a project projected to include 32 housing units and nearly 2000 sq. Ft. Of commercial space. Midtown indy also participated in planning and collaboration for two additional mixed-use developments at 38th and Illinois street and 42nd and college avenue, supporting increased housing and neighborhood-serving amenitites. In addition, midtown indy supported neighborhood improvements initiatives, including assisting the sobro neighborhood with a grant-funded signage project, and convened stateholders through the midtown economic council to advance corridor improvements and economic development strategies along key corridors, including 38th street and in broad ripple. The efforts served multiple neighborhoods, residents, and businesses across the midtown service area throughout the year.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 80% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 52% for direct work, and 48% for grants.

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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 45
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 50.5%; rating input score 50
  • Program expense ratio: 47.4%; rating input score 47
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.31 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -4.5%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.93; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.64; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 28%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.9% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.2% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.6% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 50.5% of revenue deployed · 47.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $151K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $89K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 filed related-organization links
  • 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 50/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 47/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 14/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 26/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.