University District Organization Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
310805765
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2010
Location
Columbus, OH, USA
Phone
6146104546
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$656,617
Expenses
$733,725
Assets
$452,690
Liabilities
$146,943

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Nora Gerber (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Nora Gerber (Executive Director): $80,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To improve the quality of life in the university district for area residents through community organizing & planning to address the environment, public safety, and delivery of community services.

What it reported doing in 2024

Outreach and community services for the unhoused community of the University District. A licensed social worker provides light case work, while creating linkages to treatment and immediate recovery supports to our most vulnerable clients. The social worker is provided through Southeast Healthcare as a partner in this initiative to support and improve the quality of life of those living on the streets.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 74% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

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

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 81.8%; rating input score 82; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 4.3%; rating input score 4; 25th 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -11.7%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.62; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.32; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.9%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.1% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.8% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 6 filed program accomplishments · $734K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $80K · 10 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $526K reported
  • Consistency: 38 of 40 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 4/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 34/100.