Ohio Debate Commission Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
842520547
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2020
Location
Cleveland, OH, USA
Phone
6143952071
Rating
48
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Research Institutes and Public Policy Analysis

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$37,686
Expenses
$7,812
Assets
$91,267
Liabilities
$936

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

People named in this filing

  • JERRY L MILLER (BOARD CHAIR)
  • CHRISTINE MERRITT (TREASURER)
  • DAN MOULTHROP (DIRECTOR)

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

Our mission is to foster fair and substantive debates that encourage participation in our democracy, and our vision is of a stronger Ohio, with well informed voters and highly qualified public servants, candidates, and elected officials.

What it reported doing in 2024

In 2024, debate program work included planning and organizing six candidate debates for the offices of the US Senate, Ohio Governor, and Chief Justice of the Ohio Supreme Court to which all candidates were invited, and debate participation was determined based on ODC candidate participation criteria. The criteria included meeting requirements for being on the ballot and legally qualified to be a candidate, results of independent polls, and demonstrating an active campaign with evidence of activities such as having a headquarters, raising a minimum amount of money from a minimum amount of donors, being on social media with a certain number of followers, engaging in voter activities such as house parties, parades, meet and greets, etc. Program time was spent on venue visits and selection for 2022 general election debates, in preparation for conducting each debate, moderator consideration and selection, format decisions, discussion and implemenation of question solicitation and selection, designing and deploying voter outreach plans, high school and college student engagement programs, candidate communications, media engagement and press relations, selecting and working with a prduction team, and planning for and implementing the distribution of the debates content across all eight Ohio media markets, as well as multiple other types of outlets. (e.g., universities, bar associations, AARP, civic organizations).

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.

The verdict

MIXED - 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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 75
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • 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: 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: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: 79.3%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 11.68; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -84.7% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -50.4% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -9.7% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 19 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 28/100.