Evansville Regional Economic Partnership

Legal name: Evansville Regional Business Committee Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
030408032
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Official website data refreshed
Aug 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Evansville, IN, USA
Phone
812-423-2020
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$304,023
Expenses
$282,751
Assets
$158,025
Liabilities
$340

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

Leadership & pay

22 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PARADOSSI PETER J (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • PARADOSSI PETER J (PRESIDENT): $123,600 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to cultivate a thriving and growing talent-rich Evansville Region through advocacy and collaboration between our communities, businesses, and civic leaders. We live and breathe the business cycle at E-REP to attract new investment to the Evansville Region. And that’s just where our support begins in fueling your business success. Our Business Retention and Expansion program offers effective, on-the-ground support to businesses and data-driven guidance on targeted growth opportunities. With our growth, E-REP thrives on remaining nimble and quick to adapt to evolving regional needs and priorities. **Peer Groups & Supportive Spaces: **Family Business Alliance, Tri-State Manufacturing Alliance, Coworking Spaces Community Development.

What it reported doing in 2025

The company engages business leaders in a collaborative effort to improve the economic vitality and quality of life in the regional area by advocating policy direction and encouraging appropriate projects and investment.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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 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: 44
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 48.1%; rating input score 48
  • Program expense ratio: 51.7%; rating input score 52
  • 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: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 7%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.56; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 43.7%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 48.1% of revenue deployed · 51.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 19 of 19 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $146K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $124K · 22 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 48/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 51/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.