St Petersburg Innovation District Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
812230884
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
St Petersburg, FL, USA
Phone
7272314643
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,204,940
Expenses
$977,532
Assets
$476,823
Liabilities
$14,248

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Alison Barlow (Executive Director)
  • Christian Hardigee (President)
  • Jeff Baker (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Alison Barlow (Executive Director): $161,152 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 mission of the St. Petersburg Innovation District is to develop St. Petersburg into an environment that fosters job growth, economic development, learning and inspiration by bringing innovative people and organizations together. Our vision is to harness the potential of people, institutions and businesses in the St. Petersburg Innovation District to generate collaborative solutions that will benefit the world.

What it reported doing in 2024

Facilitate greater inclusionary collaboration in search of innovation. The purpose of this activity is to increase multi-sector, cross discipline collaboration by introducing people to each other and the research or work being performed. These collaborations include organizational tours, networking events, STEM activities and speakers or panel discussions. The expectation is that by increasing collaboration we are able to find creative solutions to address community issues and generate employment opportunities for newcomers to the city and citizens in surrounding neighborhoods. Collaborations are tracked and successes shared with the broader community in the website, e-newsletter and social media. This activity is important to the purpose of the organization because it is how we foster learning and inspiration that can in turn support job growth and economic development. This activity is ongoing and occurs predominately in the District, with some events extending into the greater St. Petersburg area. The activity is guided by the Organization's Board of Directors, coordinated by the Organization's Executive Director, and performed by individuals within the member organizations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 70% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 63
  • Sustainability: 51
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 18.9%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.49; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.5%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 28.4% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 24% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $161K · 12 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 11 of 11 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.