International Economic Development Council
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 520887806
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Washington, DC, USA
- Phone
- 2022234735
- Rating
- 80
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- International, Foreign Affairs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $16,117,938
- Expenses
- $16,839,439
- Assets
- $9,660,631
- Liabilities
- $2,344,603
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
63 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- NATHAN OHLE (PRESIDENT & CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- NATHAN OHLE (PRESIDENT & CEO): $531,707 total reported compensation
- RENDELL GINES (CHIEF INNOVATION OFFICER): $257,570 total reported compensation
- JULIA KRAEGER (COO): $215,192 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Through bold leadership, collaborative partnerships, and innovative programs and solutions, iedc equips economic developers to drive equitable and sustainable outcomes for the communities they serve as: the best place to work the best place for economic developers to learn and connect the premier professional association for economic development worldwide
What it reported doing in 2024
The iedc advisory services and research (asr) department worked to improve economic opportunities for communities and regions provided technical assistance and customized analysis that helped created sustainable economic development solutions. We kept economic development professionals informed on issues and trends in the field through research, publications and information dissemination.
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
STRONG - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 68
- Transparency & Controls: 94
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 22
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 77.6%; rating input score 78
- Program expense ratio: 74.2%; rating input score 74
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 6 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -4.5%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.57; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.24; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 10.9%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 10.7% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 7.5% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 7.8% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 77.6% of revenue deployed · 74.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 53 of 53 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $12.5M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $532K · 63 people listed · 6 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $115K reported
- Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 9 filed money-flow records
- 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 18/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.