Multi-ethnic Development

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
942389209
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015
Location
Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Phone
8015212991
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Development, Construction, Management

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$73,878
Expenses
$102,417
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PAULA MARSH (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • TROY HART (INTERIM EXEC): $32,760 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The organization is one of salt lake city's oldest nonprofit organizations involved in the development, ownership, and management of affordable housing. The mission of the organization is to serve the community by developing, owning, and managing clean, safe, affordable housing for low and moderate income populations.

What it reported doing in 2015

Multi-ethnic development corporations (medc) board and outside consultants continued and finalized the organizaiton's dissolution during the fiscal year. Riverview senior housing was wholly owned by medc and was transferred during the dissolution process to a Utah nonprofit housing corporation (unphc). Unphc has exceptional affordable housing knowledge, a significant financial balance sheet, and a reputation that provides a competitive advantage over smaller and less known organizations. In addition, medc transferred its remaining cash balance to unphc. This was the final asset for the dissolution. All expenses have been paid.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 64% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 50% for direct work, and 50% for grants.

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: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 16
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91.3%; rating input score 91
  • Program expense ratio: 65.8%; rating input score 66
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 4; 4th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -38.6%; rating input score 31; 31st 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: 32%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 113.9% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 561.4% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -45.2% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 91.3% of revenue deployed · 65.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $67K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $33K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2009 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 4/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 31/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.