United Rehabilitation Services of Greater Dayton Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
261487589
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Dayton, OH, USA
Phone
9372331230
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$862,809
Expenses
$432,145
Assets
$15,789,529
Liabilities
$171,417

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHARLES KIDWELL (CHAIRMAN/PRESIDENT)
  • DENNIS GRANT (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • DENNIS GRANT (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $305,416 total reported compensation
  • RACHEL ZIDAROFF (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $154,280 total reported compensation
  • JAMES MICHAUD (CONTROLLER): $142,631 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To lend support and assistance to united rehabilitation services of greater dayton and its mission of "enhancing the quality of life for children and adults with disabilities or other special needs".

What it reported doing in 2025

To lend support and assistance to united rehabilitation services of greater dayton, inc. And its mission of "enhancing the quality of life for children and adults with disabilities or other special needs and assist residents of the greater dayton area with developmental disabilities to obtain the maximum level of independence.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 97% 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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 63
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 81
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91.6%; rating input score 92
  • Program expense ratio: 76.7%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0.12 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 10th 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: 95.7%; rating input score 96; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 49.9%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 36.54; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.4%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.1% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 91.6% of revenue deployed · 76.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $331K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $305K · 9 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 2/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 22/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 59/100.