Dawson County Tourism Business Improvement District
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 452585473
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2021–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024
- Location
- Glendive, MT, USA
- Phone
- 4066717544
- Rating
- 44
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $61,483
- Expenses
- $80,490
- Assets
- $20,991
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Christopher C Dantic (Executive Director)
People named in this filing
- Christopher C Dantic (Executive Director)
- Joe Woodward (Board Chair)
- Ann Hoff (Treasure)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Dawson County Tourism Business Improvement District promotes tourism in Dawson County, MT. The hotel assessment fee that is collected in the county helps fund tourism activities and infrastructure to market Dawson County to the U.S. and internationally.
What it reported doing in 2024
In 2024 Dawson County TBID funded nine grants that helped promote Dawson County tourism to the United States and internationally. These promotions include sports tournaments, festivals, and conventions that bring tourism to our area. All monies paid out are prefaced by invoices and receipts.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. 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: 21
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 15
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 23.2%; rating input score 23
- Program expense ratio: 17.7%; rating input score 18
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -30.9%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.26; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 12.4%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -9.1% per year; rating input score 0; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -3.7% per year; rating input score 0; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -44.7% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 23.2% of revenue deployed · 17.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $14K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
- Consistency: 5 of 7 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2021 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 23/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 18/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part I part ii net assets crosscheck did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 18/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.