Spark

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
813057920
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2016
Location
Omaha, NE, USA
Phone
4028001242
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Urban, Community Economic Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,457,261
Expenses
$1,255,706
Assets
$7,506,474
Liabilities
$4,771,410

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CAMMY WATKINS (PRESIDENT)
  • JEFFREY KEMP (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • BUEY TUT (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • BUEY TUT (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $148,980 total reported compensation
  • ANGELA SMITH (SENIOR DIRECTOR): $141,897 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Organization was established to champion community development by forming and leading partnerships that create, implement and evaluate holistic revitalization projects.

What it reported doing in 2024

Spark is a 501(c) nonprofit organization that brings a unique, collaborative and community-based approach to economic development in the omaha/council bluffs region. We recognize that philanthropic organizations, civic insitutions, and other equity partners have the resources to impact change while community residents, business owners and other stakeholders best understand the community's needs. Spark serves as a bridge between these various parties, leveraging our expertise, relationships and funding to transform neighborhoods through a process of holistic development. Holistic development applies rigorous real estate development methods while considering all the foundational assets: social, political, economic and physical, that are necessary for communities to thrive and prosper. Our role is to support and supplement the work of existing organizations, build upon existing community assets, provide funding, leverage resoures to close financing gaps and to help educate and minimize the risk for developers who would otherwise not invest in these communities. Moreover, we work hand in hand with the community to identify and train community leaders to effectively advocate for themselves both now and for future generations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 72% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 67% for direct work, and 33% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73.7%; rating input score 74
  • Program expense ratio: 83%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $13.11 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 46; 46th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

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: 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 13.8%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.98; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.64; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 23.2%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 26.7% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 16% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 33.7% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 73.7% of revenue deployed · 83% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $149K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 46/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.