Ohio Alliance of YMCA's

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
263456264
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2010
Location
Cincinnati, OH, USA
Phone
5133622021
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Business and Industry

Reported finances

Revenue
$381,937
Expenses
$373,988
Assets
$347,672
Liabilities
$31,171

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Elizabeth Tsvetkoff (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Elizabeth Tsvetkoff (CEO): $228,677 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

We are a grassroots driven and governed organization that advocates and educates on behalf of the YMCAs and its mission, upholding the four core YMCA values of caring, honestly, respect, and responsibility. The Alliance also fosters statewide communication and cooperation among Ohio YMCAs, gain consensus on issues of importance to the YMCA, and helps protect the operating integrity of the YMCA organization so it can carry out its mission.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Alliance advocates on behalf of the 164 YMCAs in Ohio, including over 1.7 million Ohio families, men, and women. In 2024, the alliance concentrated efforts on four priorities: (a) legislative advocacy for early learning and school age care, (b) benchmarks for Ohio YMCAs, (c) third party payor partnerships, and (d) collaboration with other Ohio statewide organizations and YMCA alliances in neighboring states.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 95% 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 - 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 80%; rating input score 80
  • Program expense ratio: 81.7%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2.1%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.93; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 61.1%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 80% of revenue deployed · 81.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $306K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $229K · 10 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 44/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.