Lcec
Legal name: Lee County Electric Cooperative Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 590329555
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- North Fort Myers, FL, USA
- Phone
- 239-656-2300 / 800-599-2356
- Rating
- 55
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $616,115,448
- Expenses
- $547,211,131
- Assets
- $1,262,768,758
- Liabilities
- $694,215,248
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
24 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DENISE M VIDAL (EVP/CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- DENISE M VIDAL (EVP/CEO): $813,438 total reported compensation
- SARAH BULLOCK (DIR OF FINAN): $449,205 total reported compensation
- EDWARD NAGY (DIRECTOR, IT): $376,953 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
LCEC (Lee County Electric Cooperative, Inc.) provides reliable, cost-competitive electric services to customers in Southwest Florida as a not-for-profit electric distribution cooperative. The automated landlord process will not be in place until we receive the completed request form. Landlord accounts that require a deposit are not eligible to participate in the Landlord Agreement program. Apply for Life Support APPLY FOR LIFE SUPPORT. Apply for Life Support APPLY FOR LIFE SUPPORT Check Existing Construction Status. APPLY FOR LIFE SUPPORT Check Existing Construction Status CHECK EXISTING CONSTRUCTION STATUS. Trusted partners energizing lives in the communities we serve. MISSION We are a team committed to providing reliable and competitive electric services and quality user experience.
What it reported doing in 2024
Utilizing approximately 9,195 miles of distribution lines, lee county electric cooperative, inc. Provided 4,588,781,578 kilowatt hours of electric energy to its customers located in its service territory. The service territory included cape coral, north fort myers, marco island, sanibel and captiva islands, pine island, everglades city, immokalee, ava maria, and parts of lehigh acres (all in the state of Florida).
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 99% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 90
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 68
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- 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: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 11.2%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.31; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.55; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0.9%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 10.7% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $813K · 24 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $106.4M reported
- Consistency: 14 of 15 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 26 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.