Clarion County Economic Development Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
251237688
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Clarion, PA, USA
Phone
8142269045
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public, Societal Benefit

Reported finances

Revenue
$360,403
Expenses
$734,396
Assets
$1,560,447
Liabilities
$263,200

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • WILLIAM HENRY (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • CHELSEA ALEXANDER (DIRECTOR)
  • RYAN FLICK (DIRECTOR)
  • MICHAEL FORNOF (DIRECTOR)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The corporation fosters economic growth in clarion county, Pennsylvania by promoting the county as both a hub for business development and a prime tourism destination. Ccedc's programs are designed to boost the local economy while enhancing the quality of life for businesses, residents, and visitors. Core functions include business support, strategic planning, tourism marketing, community redevelopment, industrial park development and maintenance, grant and loan administration, infrastructure expansion, and workforce and education development.

What it reported doing in 2024

The corporation fosters economic growth in clarion county, Pennsylvania by promoting the county as both a hub for business development and prime tourism destination. The clarion county economic development corporation's programs are designed to boost the local economy while enhancing the quality of life for businesses, residents, and visitors. Core functions include business support, strategic planning, tourism marketing, community redevelopment, industrial park development and maintenance, grant and loan administration, infrastructure expansion, and workforce and education development.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 92% 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 72.4%; rating input score 72
  • Program expense ratio: 89.9%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 3rd 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -103.8%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.12; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.17; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.4% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.3% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -3.4% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 72.4% of revenue deployed · 89.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $660K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 28 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • 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.
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D land buildings reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 21/100.