York Corridor Business Improvement District Management Authority Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
991756769
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2023
Location
Baltimore, MD, USA
Phone
4102044890
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$653,667
Expenses
$466,097
Assets
$217,518
Liabilities
$32,804

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Andrew Schuster (President)
  • Trudy Mcnair (Vice President)
  • Sam Storey (Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • Andrew Schuster (President)
  • Trudy Mcnair (Vice President)
  • Celeste Hall (Secretary)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

We are working towards a clean, vibrant, and hospitable York Road-where businesses and institutions thrive, commercial properties build value, residents enjoy the benefits of a thriving community, and visitors return again and again to explore all we have to offer.

What it reported doing in 2024

Public safety initiatives that prevent and reduce crime through de-escalation and peer outreach to individuals in crisis; safety patrols and presence in priority zones; resource connections for housing, employment, and recovery; community education on trauma and violence prevention; and through the use of public art to shift perceptions, elevate neighborhood identity, and create safer, more vibrant public spaces at high-visibility intersections along the corridor.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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 - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 59
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 58%; rating input score 58
  • Program expense ratio: 81.4%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $84.89 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 28.7%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.47; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.15; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 58% of revenue deployed · 81.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $379K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 43 of 43 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 58/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 22/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 36/100.