Midtown Redevelopment Corp

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
731489699
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2020, Form 990-N 2016
Location
Oklahoma City, OK, USA
Phone
4052353500
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Improvement, Capacity Building N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$255,669
Expenses
$237,427
Assets
$94,423
Liabilities
$17,157

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

People named in this filing

  • LEE PEOPLES (CHAIR)
  • JASON CLARK (CHAIR)
  • MARVA ELLARD (AT LARGE)

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

Continuation of Part I line 1, the Midtown district is part of the downtown Business Improvement District, which is managed by Downtown OKC Partnership.The BID delivers street levels amenities such as street cleaning and trash pickup, and produces events.

What it reported doing in 2024

Bid programs - the corporation represents a geographical area of properties within the downtown business improvement district bid and as such, manages the bid program funds related to the bid contract between downtown Oklahoma city partnership and the city of okc. Bid funds are allocated and overseen by the corporation to further the mission of the organization and complement districtwide bid programming. Events and projects that occurred during the 2025 fiscal year are midtown walkabout, midtown tree grant, merry midtown and 10 buck lunch.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 92% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 87% 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76.3%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 82.2%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 13th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 7.1%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.4; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.18; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -6.2% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -5.6% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 76.3% of revenue deployed · 82.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $195K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 18 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 17 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2017 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 55/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 21/100.