The Alliance for Economic Development of Oklahoma City Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
452034774
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Oklahoma City, OK, USA
Phone
4056046780
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,747,350
Expenses
$11,639,288
Assets
$1,610,530
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KENTON TSOODLE (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • KENTON TSOODLE (PRESIDENT): $357,123 total reported compensation
  • GERI HARLAN (FORMER CFO): $226,504 total reported compensation
  • J KEITH KUHLMAN (DIRECTOR OF SPECIAL PROJEC): $140,284 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 foster economic development through private and public collaborations to create new job opportunities and bring about urban redevelopment by means of consolidated and coordinated public agency economic development functions.

What it reported doing in 2024

The city of Oklahoma city contracted the alliance to manage the coronavirus state and local fiscal recovery funds business support program pursuant to the american rescue plan act (arpa). The alliance directly manages programs for technical assistance, facade improvement, pandemic mitigation, and business district capacity building grants. Eligible beneficiaries submit applications that are processed by the alliance and approved by the city for services by third-party technical assistance providers, reimbursement of commercial upgrades, or grant funds. The alliance contracts out management of programs related to workforce development and job training, accelerator training for small businesses, and supplier services to assist minority firms in getting contracts. Applications are collected by contractors and approved by the alliance and the city.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 93% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 80% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 17
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 94.5%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 96.3%; rating input score 96; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Scored; rating input score 0

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: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -210.6%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.14; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.3%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 25% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 16.6% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 25.6% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 94.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $11M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $357K · 15 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2M reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 268 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 266 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 4/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 40/100.