Southtown Council Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
431426675
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
Kansas City, MO, USA
Phone
8165235553
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$144,828
Expenses
$146,675
Assets
$-1,903
Liabilities
$10,313

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Sean Ackerson (Executive Director)
  • Tim Ahlenius (President)
  • Alicia Douglas (1st Vice President)
  • Jenny Miller (2nd Vice President)
  • Phyllis Collins (Past President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Sean Ackerson (Executive Director): $76,621 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The organization builds relationships / networks between businesses, associations and neighborhoods that create the environment for great economic and community growth. We work to strengthen existing businesses, attract new ones, improve the climate for doing business and act as a catalyst to initiate corrective action where needed. We work to keep the area a great place to live, work and do business, while also working to make connections across racial and social barriers.

What it reported doing in 2020

Provide support, technical assistance and coordination of the Brookside and Troost Avenue areas of Kansas City, MO in developing safe and healthy neighborhoods. Over 500 people / organizations were impacted through services like area awareness officers patrolling the area, maintenance staff removing trash daily, removal of illegal signs and graffiti, and promoting the area. In 2020 there were at least 5 active committees which met virtually during the year to address the items above as well as others. Approximately 30 volunteers were utilized to help welcome new businesses, promote the area, recognize good works and worked to modify, pause or replace annual programs in light of COVID 19. Large in person events like parades, a nationally recognized art fair, ribbon cuttings, networking events, a festival, and similar activities were replaced with smaller, events over longer durations to minimize large crowds will still serving community needs. The Board of Directors met virtually during 2020 to oversee major activities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 74% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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 - 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: 90
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 16
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 56.5%; rating input score 56
  • Program expense ratio: 55.8%; rating input score 56
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.67 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.3%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: -0.01; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 52.2%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -16.1% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -14.8% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -75.8% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 56.5% of revenue deployed · 55.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $82K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $77K · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 40 of 40 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2016 to 2020
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 56/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 29/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 32/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.