Bismarck-mandan Chamber Edc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 450116753
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Bismarck, ND, USA
- Phone
- 7012235660
- Rating
- 45
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,049,254
- Expenses
- $2,008,166
- Assets
- $3,175,033
- Liabilities
- $1,329,699
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
20 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- BRENDA NAGEL (PRESIDENT &)
Highest reported compensation
- BRENDA NAGEL (PRESIDENT &): $189,197 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Advocating for business. Fostering economic growth. Shaping the future of our community.
What it reported doing in 2024
Our oranization's three largest program services relate to our core mission of advocating for business. Fostering economic growth and shaping the future of our community. As an advocate we provide programing to promote our members and communities through some of our premier program events such as economic outlook forum, state of the cities, and celebrate bismarck-mandan. We also advocate through our government affairs committee work to develop a focused legislative agenda to support the wants and needs of our business members. We have large attraction programs through our talent & business attraction social media campaigns to foster economic growth with our workforce and primary sector industries. We help shape the future of community with programing to help develop leaders through our leadership bismarck-mandan program and lemonade day program.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 69% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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.
The verdict
MIXED - 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 74
- Accountability: 90
- Sustainability: 42
- 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- 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: 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: 2%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.58; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.42; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 9.4%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 19 of 19 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $189K · 20 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 12 of 13 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
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.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 41/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 54/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 32/100.