The Fan District Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
541131052
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2021
Location
Richmond, VA, USA
Phone
8043321794
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$266,592
Expenses
$174,126
Assets
$292,284
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Daniella White (President)
  • Dan Brashier (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Daniella White (President)
  • Dan Brashier (Vice President)
  • Thomas Perry (Treasurer)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

To promote the health, welfare, happiness and civic, cultural, educational, and recreational betterment of the Fan District in particular, and Richmond in general.

What it reported doing in 2024

Trees and Parks - In cooperation with the City of Richmond, the FDA maintains nine public parks and fills empty tree wells located in the Fan. Throughout the year, these green spaces are attended to allowing Fan residents to enjoy and utilize the spaces safely. Major improvements have included repairing the brick sidewalks at Meadow Park, addressing irrigation system issues, planting additional greenery and native plant species.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 73% for direct work, and 27% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. 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: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 74
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 55.3%; rating input score 55
  • Program expense ratio: 84.6%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $13.93 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 34.7%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.68; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -7.3% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.5% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 55.3% of revenue deployed · 84.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $147K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 55/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 48/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.