Dekalb County Economic Development Partnership Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
364577514
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2019
Location
Auburn, IN, USA
Phone
2609271180
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public, Societal Benefit

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$283,976
Expenses
$249,611
Assets
$355,773
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • COLLIN BICE (PRESIDENT/CE)
  • RUDI EIDAM (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • COLLIN BICE (PRESIDENT/CE): $56,333 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Were on a mission to improve the quality of life for the citizens of dekalb county through the responsible growth of business and industry. Our vision is to facilitate investment into making dekalb county a premier economic driver in northeast Indiana and in the greater midwest region of the united states.

What it reported doing in 2025

Creation and retention of quality jobs for dekalb county residents through the attraction of new employers and strengthening of existing employers including certification of three industrial sites, foreign trade zone, and small business activities. In 2025 the partnership conducted 60 business retention and expansion visits visits and worked more than 100 economic development leads focused on attracting new business and investment to dekalb county. We collaborated with workforce partners and municipalities on workforce initiatives, housing development efforts, and downtown redevelopment projects. Additionally, we successfully pursued and was awarded a 500,000 epa brownfield grant to support assessment and redevelopment efforts throughout the county.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 76% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 55
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 54
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 57.6%; rating input score 58
  • Program expense ratio: 67.9%; rating input score 68
  • 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: Limited
  • 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 12.1%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.43; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 22.6%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.8% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.3% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 57.6% of revenue deployed · 67.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $169K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $56K · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 58/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 50/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.