Economic Alliance Snohomish County
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 910647005
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Everett, WA, USA
- Phone
- 4257434567
- Rating
- 83
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Standard
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $3,287,699
- Expenses
- $3,136,799
- Assets
- $2,328,605
- Liabilities
- $993,406
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
63 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- WENDY POISCHBEG (INTERIM CEO & PRESIDENT VP ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT)
- RAYMOND STEPHANSON (PRESIDENT & CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- WENDY POISCHBEG (INTERIM CEO & PRESIDENT VP ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT): $234,518 total reported compensation
- ALYSSA JACKSON (DIRECTOR OF STEM): $144,831 total reported compensation
- OLIVIA MAISEL (DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS): $133,862 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The alliance is commited to growing and nurturing a vital regionaleconomy that is globally competitive by expanding partnerships, developing key resources, and building the infrastructure systems that create local and regional employment centers.
What it reported doing in 2024
The organization was a catalyst for economic vitality, resulting in stronger communities, increased job creation, expanded educational opportunities, and improved infrastructure.
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 91% 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 77
- Transparency & Controls: 89
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 35
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 77.5%; rating input score 77
- Program expense ratio: 80.9%; rating input score 81
- Fundraising efficiency: $24.88 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- 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: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 4.6%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.74; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.43; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 27.6%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5.2% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 8.9% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 77.5% of revenue deployed · 80.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 54 of 49 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.5M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $235K · 63 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 12 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 6 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.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 49/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 25/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Independent members within voting members did not reconcile in the filed values.