Ymca Sf Nmtc Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
261584194
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014
Location
San Francisco, CA, USA
Phone
4157779622
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Young Men's or Women's Associations

Reported finances

Revenue
$605,518
Expenses
$605,518
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

YMCA SF NMTC, Inc. Under the NMTC program, taxpayers receive a 39% tax credit on QEIs that are made in a CDE. In Revenue Ruling 2003-20, the Internal Revenue Service ruled that a taxpayer is permitted to borrow money to make an investment in a CDE. YMCA SF NMTC, Inc. was formed for the purpose of serving as the leverage lender for both the Bayview Project and the Chinatown Project. In connection with the Bayview Project, YMCA SF NMTC, Inc. loaned $3,498,500 to Bayview Fund. These loan proceeds were combined with $1,151,500 contributed to Bayview Fund by an equity investor and permitted Bayview Fund to make an aggregate QEI in Bayview CDE) of $4,650,000. With respect to the Chinatown Project, YMCA SF NMTC, Inc. agreed to loan $11,903,500 to Chinatown Fund. These loan proceeds were combined with equity investment in the Chinatown Fund of $5,596,500 to permit Chinatown Fund to make a QEI in Chinatown CDE in the amount of $17,500,000.

What it reported doing in 2014

Ymca sf nmtc, inc. Under the nmtc program, taxpayers receive a 39% tax credit on qeis that are made in a cde. In revenue ruling 2003-20, the internal revenue service ruled that a taxpayer is permitted to borrow money to make an investment in a cde. Ymca sf nmtc, inc. Was formed for the purpose of serving as the leverage lender for both the bayview project and the chinatown project. In connection with the bayview project, ymca sf nmtc, inc. Loaned $3,498,500 to bayview fund. These loan proceeds were combined with $1,151,500 contributed to bayview fund by an equity investor and permitted bayview fund to make an aggregate qei in bayview cde) of $4,650,000. With respect to the chinatown project, ymca sf nmtc, inc. Agreed to loan $11,903,500 to chinatown fund. These loan proceeds were combined with equity investment in the chinatown fund of $5,596, 500 to permit chinatown fund to make a qei in chinatown cde in the amount of $17,500,000.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 94
  • Sustainability: 19
  • Growth: 0

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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Scored; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 0%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.9%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -83.1% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -20.3% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -38.2% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 9 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $606K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $365K · 11 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 15 of 15 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay and related organizations
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2011 to 2014
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 3 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 36/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.