Cherokee County Economic Development Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
471162489
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Columbus, KS, USA
Phone
6207620717
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Improvement, Capacity Building N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$108,340
Expenses
$105,705
Assets
$91,369
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

People named in this filing

  • AMY ZORTZ (SECRETARY)
  • BOB NORRIS (DIRECTOR)
  • THOMAS NIEGISCH (TREASURER)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Attract businesses to cherokee county, Kansas, retain and assist in expansion of existing businesses throughout the county; keep apprised on new developments in law/proposed legislation, determine suitability of local physical infrastructure to meet needs of businesses in cherokee county, create and improve business community needed to grow.

What it reported doing in 2025

Create and improve the business and community backbone needed to grow the tourism industry in the county; engage in other economic development activities. Increase entrepreneurial activity in cherokee county and create a self- sustaining ecosystem favorable to long-term entrepreneurial growth.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 63% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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 - 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: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 77.7%; rating input score 78
  • Program expense ratio: 79.6%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $12.77 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 44; 44th 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: 2.4%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.86; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.1% per year; rating input score 0; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.1% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 77.7% of revenue deployed · 79.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $84K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2015 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 44/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 41/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 37/100.