Beaver County Corporation for Economic Development

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
251450625
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Beaver, PA, USA
Phone
7247288610
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,954,049
Expenses
$1,095,623
Assets
$32,361,510
Liabilities
$1,131,792

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LEWIS VILLOTTI (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • LEWIS VILLOTTI (PRESIDENT): $181,866 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Ced's mission is to encourage job creation and private investment in beaver county by: assisting in or undertaking the development of sites and structures in strategic locations for value-added companies; operating or accessing financing programs for value-added companies; and, assisting in or undertaking special initiatives that have a significant community impact.

What it reported doing in 2024

The corporation promotes and assists economic revitalization in beaver county through its development of industrial parks and facilities and business financing. The corporation's current industrial parks and facilities include 1) aliquippa industrial park, 2) monaca commerce center, 3) 1200 airport road, 4) westgate business park, 5) creekside springs, 6) 1317 7th ave and 7) 1000 3rd street. Program service expenses include land improvements, property taxes, and other costs associated with the development and operation of these sites.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 68% for direct work, and 32% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Assets have declined or grown slowly and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 67
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 84
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 77.5%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th 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: 69.1%; rating input score 69; 18th 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: 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: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 62.9%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 29.54; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.6%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.7% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 77.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $849K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $182K · 15 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $218K reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 20 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 19 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 — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.