Rockville Economic Development Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
522056731
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Rockville, MD, USA
Phone
3013158096
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public, Societal Benefit

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,212,860
Expenses
$2,202,493
Assets
$1,951,429
Liabilities
$810,277

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

Leadership & pay

27 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CYNTHIA RIVARDE (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • CYNTHIA RIVARDE (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $208,154 total reported compensation
  • RICHELLE WILSON (DEPUTY DIRECTOR): $124,294 total reported compensation
  • DANETTE NGUYEN UNTIL 122024 (MWBC MANAGING DIRECTOR): $118,148 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To identify and develop economic opportunities to help rockville prosper.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Maryland women's business center (mwbc), a program of redi, helps Maryland capital region's diverse population start and build successful women-owned enterprises that are positioned for long-term growth in our community. Mwbc conducts training, offers technical assistance, and provides resources for entrepreneurs seeking to start and grow women-owned enterprises in our community. Special initiatives include a childcare business development program and retail incubator.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 95% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 89% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86.5%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 86.9%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4,219.8 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th 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: 88.2%; rating input score 88; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.5%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.89; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.42; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20.5%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.4% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.9% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 86.5% of revenue deployed · 86.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 23 of 23 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $208K · 27 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $103K reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 20 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 16 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.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 35/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.