The Montgomery Riverfront Development Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
631275494
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015
Location
Montgomery, AL, USA
Phone
3342352240
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$153,488
Expenses
$299,992
Assets
$217,530
Liabilities
$92,511

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JUDGE MARK KENNEDY (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • LESLIE SANDERS (CHAIRMAN)
  • JUDGE MARK KENNEDY (PRESIDENT)

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 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To improve conditions and prevent future deterioration in the downtown area of montgomery, Alabama by promoting public developments and riverfront redevelopments.

What it reported doing in 2015

Funding and cost sharing for various projects relating to downtown and riverfront improvement projects intended to benefit the general public including: expenses relating to the artplace america grant, funding the five points cultural commission, expenses relating to providing public wifi services in downtown montgomery, and expenses relating to the development of a whitewater recreation facility.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 67% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 67% 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: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 99.4%; rating input score 99
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: 100%; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -95.4%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.73; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.43; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 58.8% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -139.1% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -31.6% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 99.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $298K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2010 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 17/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.