Smart Development Institute Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
473979454
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2022
Location
Falls Church, VA, USA
Phone
8337776278
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Research Institutes and/or Public Policy Analysis

Reported finances

Revenue
$755,176
Expenses
$727,601
Assets
$575,260
Liabilities
$36,387

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Roberto Llames (Director): $165,600 total reported compensation
  • Chi Han Tung (Researcher): $69,322 total reported compensation
  • Michael Lee (Director): $65,375 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.

What it reported doing in 2024

Applied Research Project with Riverside COUNTY California. SDI continued to partner with Riverside County California to implement the SMART MoBEE platform to transfer the jurisdiction into a Smart Community. SMART MoBee helps transform the community into a Smart Community by allowing your citizend to easily access community specific information workflow portlas and services right at their fingertips through their mobil devices using our Sustainable Mobile Agile Resilent Technology SMART Framework.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 50
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 96.3%; rating input score 96
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 33.3%; rating input score 33; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 3.7%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.79; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 67.7%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 83.8% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 24.8% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.6% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 96.3% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 3 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $728K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $166K · 11 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 41 of 41 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 33/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 47/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 49/100.