Rethink Coalition Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
863680934
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2023
Location
Indianapolis, IN, USA
Phone
3178500141
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Improvement, Capacity Building N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$303,862
Expenses
$219,105
Assets
$96,541
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Brenda Freije (CEO and President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Taylor Hughes (Director): $212,227 total reported compensation
  • Suzanne Stanis (Director): $98,984 total reported compensation
  • Brenda Freije (CEO and President): $70,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The Organization supports the charitable purposes of the Central Indiana Community Foundation Inc., Historic Landmarks Foundation of Indiana Inc., and The Greater Indianapolis Chamber of Commerce Inc. ("Supported Organizations") by working to (1) promote connectivity by improving highways and streets, (2) enhance the environment, (3) reduce infrastructure barriers that fragment communities, (4) create a healthier community and environment by increasing transportation options, (5) ensure dignity, and local engagement in city infrastructure decisions, and to (6) increase opportunities for sustainable economic planning and development.

What it reported doing in 2024

The organization continued its educational mission by hosting or participating in over 100 stakeholder meetings and presentations and providing regular email and website updates, reaching over 1000 people. The objective for the meetings, presentations, and communications was to continue engaging stakeholders in a community conversation about options of rebuilding the city's urban highways using recessed construction. They were also designed to provide general education about urban highway infrastructure design and engage community members in discussions about alternatives. Expenses for meeting spaces and materials distributed at these meetings were donated. A majority of the organization's time dedicated to its educational activities outside of education attributed to the SE Gateway Planning Study was donated as in-kind services

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 82% 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.

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 some related-organization disclosures are missing.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 64
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 70.9%; rating input score 71
  • Program expense ratio: 98.4%; rating input score 98
  • Fundraising efficiency: $156.55 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 22nd 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: 27.9%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.44; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 31.9%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 96.7% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 64.9% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 70.9% of revenue deployed · 98.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 12 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $216K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $212K · 13 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 38 of 39 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 22/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.