Inland Northwest Aerospace Consortium

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
462634530
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2023
Location
Liberty Lake, WA, USA
Rating confidence
Limited

Reported finances

Revenue
$54,888
Expenses
$51,873
Assets
$8,645
Liabilities
$16,750

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Mark Norton (Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • Mark Norton (Executive Director)
  • Greg Konkol (Director)
  • Mike Marzetta (Director)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

The purpose of this organization is to promote the aerospace manufacturing industry in the Inland Northwest and in connection therewith to help shape a favorable legislative and regulatory environment encourage innovation and productivity facilitate employment growth and increase public understanding of the industry and its economic contribution to the region.

What it reported doing in 2025

The purpose of this organization is to promote the aerospace manufacturing industry in the Inland Northwest and in connection there with to help shape a favorable legislative and regulatory environment encourage innovation and productivity facilitate employment growth and increase public understanding of the industry and its economic contribution to the region.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 83% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 5.5%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.17; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.94; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -15.3% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -27.3% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 17/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 54/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 2/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.