Yakima County Development Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
911284283
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
Yakima, WA, USA
Phone
5095751140
Rating
44
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$12,280,886
Expenses
$12,473,725
Assets
$2,653,869
Liabilities
$882,764

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

28 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • JONATHAN SMITH (Executive Dir.): $134,818 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Enhance the income, quality of life and employment stability of yakima country residents by retaining, expanding, and recruiting business and industry.

What it reported doing in 2020

Ycda supports building local businesses and provides workforce and community leadership. In 2020, ycda administered approximately $12 million in cares act grants to 1,400 local businesses representing over 6,000 jobs. Ycda held pop-up events throughout the county as well as one-on-one meetings with business owners to make applying for these funds as easy as possible. This outreach and support were available in english and spanish. In addition, ycda performed 150+ local company outreach visits and supported 4 local business expansion projects. Ycda organized over a dozen webinars and produced 34 covid business resources videos that received 5,164 views.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 98% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

MIXED - Most voting board members are independent and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 24
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 6.5%; rating input score 7; 9th 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; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.6%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.21; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.33; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.1%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 34.8% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 26 of 26 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $135K · 28 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 16 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2010 to 2020
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 9 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 5/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 46/100.