Delaware Electric Cooperative
Legal name: Delaware Electric Cooperative Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 510011975
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Greenwood, DE, United States
- Phone
- 855-332-9090
- Rating
- 48
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $257,934,054
- Expenses
- $245,575,627
- Assets
- $508,679,399
- Liabilities
- $251,931,277
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
24 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ROBERT BOOK (PRESIDENT/CE)
Highest reported compensation
- ROBERT BOOK (PRESIDENT/CE): $548,076 total reported compensation
- DWAYNE STREET (COO): $386,796 total reported compensation
- JESSE SPAMPINATO (VP OPERATION): $335,613 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Delaware Electric Cooperative (DEC) is a unique utility, and our business model is strikingly different from investor-owned utilities. Our only goal is to do what’s best for our members. Here is our mission statement: “We are committed to providing safe, reliable and competitively priced energy services and empowering our members to improve their quality of life.” Delaware Electric Cooperative (DEC) was founded by a group of farmers in 1936 to bring the life-changing benefits of electricity to rural Delaware. Farms that once sat dark at night were suddenly illuminated and the lives of thousands of Kent and Sussex County residents were changed forever. Our Co-op was built by those we serve an.
What it reported doing in 2025
Safe and effective delivery of electricity to the members of dec. The three largest program services, as measured by expenses, are as follows: cost of power 161,000,335 other salaries and wages 20,553,719 benefits paid to or for members 17,985,278
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 99% 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 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: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 76
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 52
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 49.1%; rating input score 49; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 4.8%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.07; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.5; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 1.8%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $548K · 24 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $28.9M reported
- Consistency: 13 of 15 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 33 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 9 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.
- 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 49/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 54/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 49/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 42/100.