Lake County Partnership for Economic Dev

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
364206288
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Lincolnshire, IL, USA
Phone
8475971220
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Economic Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,348,986
Expenses
$1,352,233
Assets
$1,355,846
Liabilities
$612,568

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

Leadership & pay

41 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KEVIN CONSIDINE (PRESIDENT & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • KEVIN CONSIDINE (PRESIDENT & CEO): $276,310 total reported compensation
  • RONALD LANZ (BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT DIREC): $144,021 total reported compensation
  • BARBARA PRUSILA (MARKETING AND COMMUNICATIO): $120,292 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To maintain economic vitality and quality of life in lake county, Illinois by creating and retaining quality jobs, stimulating capital investment, pursuing economic diversity and improving the county's business climate.

What it reported doing in 2025

The organization implements an economic development program that focuses on a) attracting, retaining, and expanding businesses, b) advocating for infrastructure improvements, and c) spearheading initiatives that bolster business success. The organization achieves this through strategic relationships with state program administrators, the lake county development community, and municipalities within lake county. As a result, lake county maintains and continues to improve its appeal as a great place to live, work, and grow.

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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 93
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 79%; rating input score 79
  • Program expense ratio: 78.4%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: $13.09 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • 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: 96.9%; rating input score 97; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.2%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.45; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 40%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 79% of revenue deployed · 78.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 31 of 32 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $276K · 41 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 44/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 29/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Whistleblower policy not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 13/100.