The Old West End

Legal name: Old West End Association Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
341293695
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Official website data refreshed
Jul 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2022
Location
Toledo, Ohio, US
Phone
(567) 698-7969
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$148,024
Expenses
$139,506
Assets
$825,801
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN HOWARD (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • LAURE HAMMOND (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • KIMBERLY HOWARD (TREASURER)
  • JOHN HOWARD (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • AMANDA KIGHT DURKIN (SECRETARY)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Old West End Association is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization dedicated to preserving and enhancing the historic Old West End neighborhood in Toledo, Ohio, through community engagement, revitalization projects, and cultural events.

What it reported doing in 2025

Promotion and upkeep of the historic old west end, including the old west end festival and charitable activities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 69% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 92% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 64
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 65.9%; rating input score 66
  • Program expense ratio: 84.4%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 54.2%; rating input score 54; 46th 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: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: 5.8%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.92; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.6% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.3% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 65.9% of revenue deployed · 84.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $118K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 54/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 49/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.