Vancouvers Downtown Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
911816711
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Vancouver, WA, USA
Phone
3602581129
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$486,644
Expenses
$369,258
Assets
$475,342
Liabilities
$6,782

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Michael Walker (Executive Director)
  • Linda Glover (President)
  • Marianne Wilson Stein (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Michael Walker (Executive Director): $100,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Incorporated in 1989, Vancouver's Downtown Association (VDA) is a designated Washington Main Street Program that engages in revitalization efforts to keep downtown vibrant. Our initiatives aim to create an appealing employment center, boost foot traffic to small business, and enhance the quality of life for residents.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Vancouver Downtown Association (VDA) continues to build on past accomplishments, advancing meaningful progress across three core program areas. The expanded Clean & Safe Program has strengthened downtown's overall appearance and sense of security through consistent on-the-ground support and enhanced maintenance efforts. The VDA also deepened its business retention and support initiatives by providing direct grants, technical assistance, and other targeted resources that have helped local businesses remain resilient and thrive. Additionally, the organization advanced several transformative placemaking projects-including the Main Street Promise infrastructure project-which are revitalizing the downtown streetscape, improving walkability, and fostering a more vibrant and welcoming community core.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 79% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 88% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 57
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 57
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 52.7%; rating input score 53
  • Program expense ratio: 69.4%; rating input score 69
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.58 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 29.2%; rating input score 29; 39th 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: 24.1%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.29; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 27.1%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.8% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.5% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 52.7% of revenue deployed · 69.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $256K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $100K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 53/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 29/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 41/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 47/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.