Greater Portland Economic Development District
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 061706401
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Portland, OR, USA
- Phone
- 5034458065
- Rating
- 58
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Human Service Organizations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $480,530
- Expenses
- $81,530
- Assets
- $440,870
- Liabilities
- $193,387
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
32 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MONIQUE CLAIBORNE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- MONIQUE CLAIBORNE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $311,485 total reported compensation
- JAMES RADER (CFO): $50,717 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 promote regional economic development
What it reported doing in 2024
During 2024, greater portland economic development district (gpedd) continued to promote regional economic development.gpedd updates the comprehensive economic development strategy (ceds) for the region every five years. The greater portland ceds seeks to unify the region around three core pillars: strong economic growth, equity and resilience. These pillars informed the ceds framework and subsequent recommendations. The strategy charts a bold new vision for the greater portland region, one with an equitable, innovative, resilient and forward-thinking economy that fosters upward economic mobility for individuals and prosperity for businesses. The gpedd board is committed to ensuring successful implementation of the recommendations from 2022 through 2027.over 250 regional partners representing more than 100 organizations, jurisdictions and businesses were engaged during this 18-month process to collaborate, create and refine the direction of this work.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 99% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- 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
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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 40
- Transparency & Controls: 65
- Accountability: 82
- Sustainability: 72
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 16.8%; rating input score 17
- Program expense ratio: 92%; rating input score 92
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 83%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.41; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.44; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 59.8%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -5.3% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 9.8% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 18.1% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 16.8% of revenue deployed · 92% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 30 of 30 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $75K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $311K · 32 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 14 of 14 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 11 filing years from 2012 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- Related organizations: 2 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 17/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 9 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 12/100.