Stl Partnership Cdc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 431196731
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Saint Louis, MO, USA
- Phone
- 3146157663
- Rating confidence
- Limited
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $296,164
- Expenses
- $401,663
- Assets
- $100,576
- Liabilities
- $47,055
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
17 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JOHN DARRELL SCOTT (PRESIDENT/CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- JOSH AYERS (ASSISTANT TREASURER): $195,930 total reported compensation
- HOWL BEAN (IN-HOUSE COUNSEL): $142,115 total reported compensation
- JOHN DARRELL SCOTT (PRESIDENT/CEO): $136,629 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 further the economic development of st. Louis county to promote and assist the growth and development of business concerns, including small business concerns in st. Louis county. (the principal objective of the corporation shall be to benefit the community by fostering increased employment opportunities and expansion of small business and industry for the citizens of st. Louis county.) to serve as a certified development company for the small business administration ("sba") and to facilitate the making of sba loans to small businesses located in st. Louis county and any other county in which it is authorized by the sba to operate.
What it reported doing in 2024
Stl partnership certified development company (also known as stl partnership cdc, or cdc) manages a successful small business administration (sba) 504 loan program. Cdc's board of directors is responsible for the evaluation and approval for multiple loan programs for st. Louis economic development partnership (the partnership), st. Louis county industrial development authority (ida) and st. Louis port authority (port).
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 72% 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: 86
- Sustainability: 10
- Growth: 0
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; 64th 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: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -35.6%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.25; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.47; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 29.8%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: -2.3% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -17.2% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
- Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $196K · 17 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: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 11/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.