Portland Streetcar Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
931179323
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Portland, OR, USA
Phone
5032224200
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,453,003
Expenses
$1,405,356
Assets
$1,231,571
Liabilities
$523,758

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAN BOWER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JASON KRAUSE (TECHNICAL DIRECTOR): $228,473 total reported compensation
  • DAN BOWER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $202,344 total reported compensation
  • ANDREW PLAMBECK (PUBLIC AFFAIRS MANAGER): $139,960 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

See schedule o.link neighborhoods with a convenient and attractive transportation alternative. Fit the scale and traffic patterns of existing neighborhoods. Provide quality service to attract new transit ridership. Reduce short inner-city auto trips, parking demand, traffic congestion and air pollution. Encourage development of more housing & businesses

What it reported doing in 2024

Development and operation of a streetcar system to link business, housing, employment, and tourism districts in the greater portland metropolitan area, serving over 3.5 million riders annually.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 77% 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 80.4%; rating input score 80
  • Program expense ratio: 83.1%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0.46 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.3%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.88; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.43; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 40.6%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -8% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -5.4% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 80.4% of revenue deployed · 83.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $228K · 20 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 2/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 45/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.