Greater Columbus Economic Development Co

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
810788139
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Columbus, IN, USA
Phone
8123787300
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$691,409
Expenses
$608,510
Assets
$665,865
Liabilities
$4,000

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

60 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JASON HESTER (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JASON HESTER (PRESIDENT): $156,459 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To build a world-class community by enhancing the quality of life, economic opportunity and personal well-being of our citizens.

What it reported doing in 2024

Administrative and marketing services for the retention and expansion of existing primary businesses: edc works and acts as the coordinator of existing business retention and expansion activities for the communities of bartholomew county, Indiana. These activities include actively meeting oneonone with existing primary businesses and encouraging business retention by identifying and addressing any impediments to individual business operations or business needs. Services also incldue all necessary activities related to business expansion including, but not limited to, identifying, assembling, and submitting applicable expansion space, securing state and local incentive packages, and overseeing the entire process.

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 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 75
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 70.9%; rating input score 71
  • Program expense ratio: 80%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 56.7%; rating input score 57; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 12%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.09; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 25.7%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.3% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 70.9% of revenue deployed · 80% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 34 of 60 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $487K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $156K · 60 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $280K reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 57/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.