Dream City

Legal name: The Dream Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
460942657
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2019
Location
Iowa City, IA, United States
Phone
319-214-0410
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,350,596
Expenses
$414,374
Assets
$2,714,238
Liabilities
$559,603

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Fred Newell (Executive Dir.): $67,095 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Dream City is dedicated to strengthening families and transforming lives through holistic programs for youth and adults, working to inspire and empower communities through advocacy, arts, and community development. We’re dedicated to strengthening families, and transforming lives. Dream City, initially known as The Dream Center, was established by Frederick Newell on May 30, 2012, as a proactive response to a critical societal challenge. This organization was founded as a beacon of change amidst the rising impact of absentee and uninvolved fathers on youth. Recognizing the multi-dimensional nature of this issue, Dream City understood that addressing it required more than just a youth-focused approach; a comprehensive, family-oriented strategy was paramount. This approach directly supports our mission to inspire and empower communities through advocacy, arts, and community...

What it reported doing in 2024

Youth Program-Our Youth Leadership Academy is broken into two sectors summer and after school. Our Summer program provided mentoring academic, and personal enrichment activities to 300+ youth in the summer, ages 10-17. The program was 4 days a week for 6 weeks throughout the summer. Our RISE After School Youth Leadership Program provided quality after-school programming consisting of weekly goal setting, academic supports, service projects, mentoring and group discussions focused on character, and building community connections. This program served 100+ youth ages 9-17 5 days a week. This program was funded by Johnson County Board of Supervisors Juvenile Justice Youth Development Fund. This year the program also included conferences.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 94% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 42
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 79
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 13.7%; rating input score 14
  • Program expense ratio: 77.4%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $44.92 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 77; 77th 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 82.4%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.55; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.2%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 41.6% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 50.1% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 13.7% of revenue deployed · 77.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $321K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $67K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • 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.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 14/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.