Greater Seattle Partners

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
825212762
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Seattle, WA, USA
Phone
2063898650
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Economic Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,829,596
Expenses
$2,580,252
Assets
$1,053,914
Liabilities
$216,073

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

Leadership & pay

27 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRIAN SURRATT (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
  • ROBERT PAYNE (VICE PRESIDENT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • BRIAN SURRATT (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $275,058 total reported compensation
  • REBECCA LOVELL (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $256,000 total reported compensation
  • JOSH DAVIS (CHIEF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT & SVP): $222,525 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Our vision is that every person in the greater seattle region has an opportunity to prosper. We will do that by attracting quality family/living wage jobs to all parts of the region; sustaining jobs across all income levels; telling the story globally of our talent, pioneering spirit, unique communities and high quality of life; and collaborating with community and economic development organizations and partners.

What it reported doing in 2024

Business attraction works in partnership with the private sector, cities, counties, ports and economic development organizations to attract business and investment and strengthen and unify the region's economic development goals and practices.

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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 48
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 47.6%; rating input score 48
  • Program expense ratio: 52.2%; rating input score 52
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.55 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 95.8%; rating input score 96; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8.8%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.41; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 35.8%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 25.4% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -12% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 47.6% of revenue deployed · 52.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 23 of 24 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $275K · 27 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • 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.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 52/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 36/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.