Madison Economic Partners Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
820435097
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Rexburg, ID, USA
Phone
2083563677
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,402
Expenses
$4,000
Assets
$5,807

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KYLE KINGHORN (President)

People named in this filing

  • KYLE KINGHORN (President)
  • SHAWN PERKINS (Director)
  • JOSH BINGHAM (Treasurer)

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 organization promotes economic development in madison county, Idaho by directing efforts to bring businesses and employers to the area. The organization also promotes economic development by sponsoring initiatives to foster entrepreneurship and economic gardening.

What it reported doing in 2025

The organization sponsored the byu-Idaho student pitch competition by awarding cash prizes for 1st, 2nd, and 3rd places. This program is open to byu-Idaho students and fosters real world startup business plans reviewed by a panel of judges made up of various local business and community leaders.

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
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 total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 66
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 47.6%; rating input score 48
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 52.4%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.45; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -11.7% per year; rating input score 0; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -14.3% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -12.6% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 47.6% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 48/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 57/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.