Greater Sterling Development Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
363706308
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Sterling, IL, USA
Phone
8156255255
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Urban, Community Economic Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$950,454
Expenses
$1,204,220
Assets
$9,284,119
Liabilities
$4,513,791

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • HEATHER SOTELO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • HEATHER SOTELO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $123,536 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 greater sterling development corporation (gsdc) was created to coordinate and streamline economic development efforts in the city of sterling, whiteside county and the surrounding areas.

What it reported doing in 2024

Incubator management - operate 50,000 sq ft industrial facility for the city of sterling, Illinois. Recruit and assist start-up businesses, marketing and planning. Rent and maintain real estate for local businesses. Also provide loans to start-up businesses in conjunction with the city of sterling's revolving loan fund. The organization leases one of its buildings to various local non-profit organizations at no cost. The in-kind rent contribution is estimated to be $108,000 for the current year.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 86% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 91
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 87.8%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.84 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 88.8%; rating input score 89; 38th 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: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -26.7%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.71; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.49; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.3%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 87.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $124K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 41/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 16/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 36/100.