Coloma Watervliet Area Economic Development Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
382810001
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2023
Location
Coloma, MI, USA
Phone
2694684430
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$80,501
Expenses
$87,373
Assets
$43,784
Liabilities
$1,717

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

People named in this filing

  • KENDYL ADAMS (MEMBER)
  • LINDA FREITAG (TREASURER)
  • TOM GEAR (MEMBER)

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

Sustaining and improving the economic vitality of north berrien county through developing family oriented communities with joint programs, services and regulatory alignment among the active municipalities.

What it reported doing in 2025

Coordination of festivals, parades, events, ribbon cuttings to promote new and existing businesses in the coloma and watervliet area. Specific program events and accomplishments include: community programs included: halloween trunk or treat, santa events, golf outing, and st. Pat evening lighted parade business recognition and community service awards administered the revolving loan fund to local businesses ribbon cutting at area businesses community representation on the watervliet city dda, coloma city dda, and at swmi regional chamber community beautification and improvement programs included coloma's randall park/splash pad project. Cwaedc participated in the fundraising for the randall park/splash pad project in coloma. Grants were given to the city of coloma for the cost of installation. The splash pad was opened in october 2024. Watervliet "main street oasis" - bands, crafters, food trucks once a week throughout the summer.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 72% for direct work, and 28% for grants.

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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 95
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 95.8%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: $20.9 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -8.5%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.5; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -68.1% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.6% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 95.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $84K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 42/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.