Community Broadband Action Network

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
873391350
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2022
Location
West Des Moines, IA, USA
Phone
8774055774
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public, Society Benefit N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$225,419
Expenses
$248,868
Assets
$2,986
Liabilities
$12,529

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DEB SOCIA (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • CURTIS DEAN (EXECUTIVE DI): $3,667 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To improve, promote, advance, and expand community broadband, digital inclusion, and digital literacy by developing, conducting, publishing, promoting and distributing research, education, training, publications, and other related information and to support similiar activities conducted by other public entities, nonprofit agencies, and educational institutions with similar purposes.

What it reported doing in 2025

Developed, implemented, and trained a full-time digital navigator paid for by a grant from the national digital inclusion alliance. Adminstered fiscal oversight systems to administer grant funds, including budgeting, accounting structures, payroll, and insurance. Tracked strategic programmatic activities by implementing effective activity and contact systems. Progressed on contracted program management, data management, and community outreach by attending meeting schedules, developing supports, and processes for the digital navigator. Attend cohort oreintations, trainings, and other online program meetings organized and hosted by ndia. Drafted and issued community flyers, press releases and website updates pertaining to the grant award and program goals. Created program asset mapping and baseline program materials for community outreach in the targeted areas; initiate initial contacts. Researched best practices and guides pertaining to developing and providing effective digital navigator program services. Drafted early pilot client intake and skilling baselines and milestones. Met with Iowa-based digital equity stakeholders to drive national digital navigator corps success in Iowa in future years. Developed specific program topics for cyber security and digital genealogy programs as a gateway to other dn assistance. Recorded an broadcasted broadband bunch podcasts on digital navigations, equity, and ndia dn program. Attended county fairs in july for more in-person contact to introduce the program to residents.

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 85% 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 13
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 95.2%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: 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: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: -10.4%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.01; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 4.2; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.5%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 32.6% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -55.2% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 95.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $237K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $4K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 18/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 34/100.