One Village Alliance

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
352367946
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2023
Forms available
Form 990 2023, Form 990-EZ 2013, Form 990-N 2009
Location
Wilmington, DE, USA
Phone
8559688433
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Development Programs

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,546,833
Expenses
$1,152,420
Assets
$1,672,991
Liabilities
$10,324

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Chandra Pitts (Executive Director)
  • Ernest Harmon (Board President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Chandra Pitts (Executive Director): $291,824 total reported compensation
  • Jahlihl Coleman (VP of Operations): $99,964 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

One Village Alliance mission is served through direct educational and mentoring programs family strengthening with a focus on fatherhood and community mobilization toward social justice.

What it reported doing in 2023

One Village Alliance OVA will lead the highly collaborative development of Wilmingtons first community-based Urban Wellness Center; a 10,0000 sq. ft. community space within one of Wilmingtons Opportunity Zones directly across from a 120-unit low-income housing facility and adjacent to 2 daycare facilities. This means direct access to hundreds of families with many more in virtual reach statewide. Project Freedom supports OVAs mission in building an infrastructure to foster healthy behaviors implement programs and increase access to the community with innovative place-based solutions targeting Black Brown and undocumented residents at the highest risk for poor health

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 96% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 53
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 65
  • Sustainability: 70
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 41.3%; rating input score 41
  • Program expense ratio: 91.2%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • 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: 71.4%; rating input score 71; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 54.8%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.45; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 34%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 83.9% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 16.5% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.3% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 41.3% of revenue deployed · 91.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 7 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $292K · 7 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $301K reported
  • Consistency: 43 of 43 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2023
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 41/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.