Tremont West Development Corp
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 237029247
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Cleveland, OH, USA
- Phone
- 2165750920
- Rating
- 83
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Community, Neighborhood Development
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,185,741
- Expenses
- $981,409
- Assets
- $1,808,887
- Liabilities
- $850,402
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
15 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- TOM TOSUKSRI (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- JULIE DAHLHAUSEN (EXECUTIVE DI): $82,000 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Tremont west development corp serves tremont by organizing an inclusive community, building a unified neighborhood, and promoting a unique destination.
What it reported doing in 2024
Tremont west offers fiscal agency support to smaller community projects and organizations, helping them access funding and manage budgets effectively. This program enhances the impact of grassroots initiatives by providing administrative oversight, compliance monitoring, and grant management. Costs are associated with staff time and financial systems, while revenue includes administrative fees. The organization supports small business development, offering technical assistance, workshops, and individualized support to help local entrepreneurs thrive. Programs focus on business planning, funding access, and marketing strategies. Expenses include training materials, consultant fees, and staff time. These services generate revenue from sponsorships and fees while supporting local economic development. Tremont west engages in city engagement efforts, acting as a liaison between the community and municipal entities to ensure equitable access to city programs and services. This includes advocacy for affordable housing, infrastructure improvements, and public safety. Costs involve staff time and community outreach efforts, while revenue may derive from government grants or contracts. This work involves collaborating transparently and cooperatively with residents, business leaders, and external community partners to optimize resources and implement neighborhood plans that address challenges, providing everyone the opportunity to progress, lead healthy lives, and thrive
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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and revenue has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 75
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 60
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 80.7%; rating input score 81
- Program expense ratio: 76.3%; rating input score 76
- Fundraising efficiency: $11.25 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 42; 42nd 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- 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: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 17.2%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.84; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.47; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 8.4%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 0.4% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 3.8% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 80.7% of revenue deployed · 76.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $749K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $82K · 15 people listed
- Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 42/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 17/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 42/100.