Buchanan County Economic Development Commission

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
421441695
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Independence, IA, USA
Phone
3193347497
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$161,132
Expenses
$154,346
Assets
$634,988
Liabilities
$5,097

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GERALD DENNIE (President)
  • DARIN HAYZLETTE (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • LISA KREMER (Executive Dir.): $75,000 total reported compensation
  • SHAWN BAINBRIDGE (COMMUNICATIONS): $21,365 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The primary mission of buchanan county economic development commission (bcedc) is to foster a strong economic environment which supports business nurtures growth and new investment while attracting sustainable businesses and a quality labor force to our communities. The organization will rely on trusting relationships to unite the communities of buchanan county to promote and facilitate economic developmentand to improve the quality of life in our area by building sustainable wealth for those who live, work and play in this portion of the cedar valley region of Iowa.

What it reported doing in 2024

Our organization is building a strong, growing economy by supporting businesses, attracting investments, and bringing quality jobs to buchanan county. We are uniting our communities to drive sustainable growth, improve lives, and build lasting wealth across the cedar valley region of Iowa.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 92% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 51
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.9%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 85%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $19.17 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.2%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.11; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 62.4%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.4% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.9% of revenue deployed · 85% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 19 of 19 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $131K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $75K · 20 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 57/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 49/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 47/100.