Latah Economic Development Council Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
820415890
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2015
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Moscow, ID, USA
Phone
2088837165
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$23
Expenses
$911
Assets
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARTIN ERKELA (President)
  • PAUL KIMMELL (Vice President)
  • DEBBIE SPURGEON (Past President)

People named in this filing

  • JANICE MCMILLAN (Treasurer)
  • MARTIN ERKELA (President)
  • PAUL KIMMELL (Vice President)

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 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Latah Economic Development Council (LEDC) is dedicated to the creation and implementation of a coordinated comprehensive program of economic development to improve the future of Latah County in a manner compatible with local values. LEDC focuses its efforts on business development and retention and community development.

What it reported doing in 2015

LEDC performed its mission of business and community development by: Creating and implementing plans and projects; Building strategic partnerships and working with partners to accomplish defined goals; Supporting and assisting programs and projects of other entities; Advocating actions that support EDC goals; Providing resources for business growth and development; Participating in economic development modeling and planning; Educating the community about and facilitating discussion of economic development issues.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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: 7
  • 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: -3,860.9%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -30.4% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -11.4% per year; rating input score 0; 20th 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: 4 of 4 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2010 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.