The District Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
363927582
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2018
Forms available
Form 990 2018
Location
Rock Island, IL, USA
Phone
3097946711
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$90,702
Expenses
$89,135
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ERIK READER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ERIK READER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $26,762 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The district is a non-profit merchants' association dedicated to the revitalization of downtown rock island. In 1992, businesses banded together to revitalize downtown rock island - to make it the arts & entertainment destination of the region.

What it reported doing in 2018

The district's mission is to make downtown rock island a creative and innovative experience. To do this, the district directs and manages a series of community events. The district produces two primary revenue generating community festivals: gumbo ya ya, which celebrates Louisiana culture and ya maka my weekend, a caribbean festival. The district also partners with a sports themed festival, the rock island grand prix. The rock island grand prix racing association brings knowledge of kart racing and the district provides the logistics and festival expertise and also acts as a liaison with the downtown businesses. This partnership allows the district to bring a high quality festival to the community and increases public awareness of our downtown. This event is free to the public.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and the required major-donor schedule is missing or incomplete.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 53
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 98.3%; rating input score 98
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: No; rating input score 0
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.7%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 30%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -19.8% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -12.1% per year; rating input score 0; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -12.1% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 98.3% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $89K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $27K · 9 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 15 of 15 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2011 to 2018
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Major donor itemization scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 59/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.