Eastern Plains Rc & D Area Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
810473155
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2009–2010
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2010
Location
Glendive, MT, USA
Phone
4063773318
Rating
62
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Rural Economic Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$32,420
Expenses
$56,716
Assets
$107,279

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2010. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2010. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the eastern plains rc&d area, inc. Is to improve the quality of life in carter, custer, daniels, dawson, fallon, garfield, mccone, powder river, prairie, richland, roosevelt, rosebud, sheridan, treasure, valley and wibaux counties through a comprehensive and coordinated effort of local citizens; and to provide local decision makers with technical information and assistance and the necessary access to resources to better manage, conserve, protect, and utilize the area's natural and humanresources. Eprc&d helps secure technical, financial, educational, and other assistance required to develop and carry out an area plan. The rc&d cooperates with other organizations whose purpose and goals parallel those of this organization.

What it reported doing in 2010

Revolving loan program - loaned $55,000 to business to get it started.through the use of the rc&ds revolving loan fund (rlf), a small business in glendive was able to expand and renovate their business. The fund has helped one small business increase the capacity of its daycare services as well as improve the building.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 72% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 57
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 24
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 67.7%; rating input score 68
  • Program expense ratio: 38.6%; rating input score 39

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -74.9%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.89; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: Limited

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -65.6% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -78.2% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -20.1% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 67.7% of revenue deployed · 38.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $22K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2009 to 2010
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.