Columbia River Economic Development Council
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 911186305
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Vancouver, WA, USA
- Phone
- 3606945006
- Rating
- 66
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,185,859
- Expenses
- $1,166,425
- Assets
- $1,151,889
- Liabilities
- $74,263
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
56 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JENNIFER BAKER THRU 825 (PRESIDENT & BOARD MEMBER)
- ERIC HOLMES (INTERIM PRESIDENT (AUG - DEC))
Highest reported compensation
- CLINTEN HENDRICKS (VP BUSINESS DEVOLOPMENT): $141,563 total reported compensation
- JENNIFER BAKER THRU 825 (PRESIDENT & BOARD MEMBER): $124,058 total reported compensation
- JULIA KRIVORUK (DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS): $109,494 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The columbia river economic development council is established to coordinate the use of public and private resources to achieve a diversified, balanced, and healthy economic environment. Its purpose will be to define, support, and promote policies and activities, and to undertake and participate in projects which contribute to the economic stability and growth of clark county, thereby increasing employment and investment opportunities.
What it reported doing in 2025
In 2025, columbia river economic development council (credc) continued to provide service contracts, consulting studies, and research and reports for various private and municipal entities located within clark county, Washington and the greater portland region. Through business retention, recruitment and entrepreneurial support, credc promotes job creation and capital investment in the local area. Project impact included 4 recruitment and expansion wins resulting in $209 million in capital investment and approximately 425 new and retained jobs in clark county.
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 92% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 47
- Transparency & Controls: 88
- Accountability: 70
- Sustainability: 35
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 52%; rating input score 52
- Program expense ratio: 52.6%; rating input score 53
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 94.5%; rating input score 94; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 96.2%; rating input score 96; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 3 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 1.6%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.99; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 32.2%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 0.2% per year; rating input score 100; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 11% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 52% of revenue deployed · 52.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 51 of 53 board members independent · 3 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $614K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $142K · 56 people listed
- Consistency: 34 of 35 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 52/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 53/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 35/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 40/100.