Center for Economic Growth Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
222880333
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Albany, NY, USA
Phone
5184311416
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Economics

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,456,973
Expenses
$1,662,378
Assets
$1,334,669
Liabilities
$274,340

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARK EAGAN (PRESIDENT & CEO)
  • DON WIESENFORTH (SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, CEG)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARK EAGAN (PRESIDENT & CEO): $522,666 total reported compensation
  • KATHERINE JN BELMONT (CHIEF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT): $204,577 total reported compensation
  • CHRISTINE HOLLE (VP, FINANCE & OPERATIONS): $150,484 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Provide customized strategies to small-to-middle sized companies in the manufacturing technology sectors to improve productivity, increase sales, reduce costs, launch new products and grow their bottom line. In addition, we engage in a variety of initiatives to develop a skilled workforce to serve the region's employer community.

What it reported doing in 2024

Manufacturing solutions - objective is to service small to medium sized companies (smes) in the manufacturing and technology sectors across several industries and help them grow and compete in the 21st century. The program is supported by New York states nystart program (division of science, technology and innovation) and the nist (national institute of standards and technology) through the manufacturing extension partnership program. These services help smes realize new revenues and increase profitability through assisting them in increasing sales, improving productivity and operations, launching new products, aligning executive team strategies and more. Internal ceg team members, as well as third-party partners, provide these services. Ceg is also recognized as the regional technology development center (rtdc), focused on promoting technology development, technology transfer, management, and technology sectors. This designation allows ceg to leverage grant funds for clients through partners such as national grid and the workforce development institute.

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 88% 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 21
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 95.4%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 96.9%; rating input score 97; 44th 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 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -14.1%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.8; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 27.6%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -6.3% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -8.8% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.4% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 95.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $523K · 10 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 13/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.