Maine International Trade Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
010509118
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Portland, ME, USA
Phone
2075417400
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Agricultural Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,915,257
Expenses
$1,932,443
Assets
$1,615,348
Liabilities
$956,851

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Wade Merritt (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Wade Merritt (President): $196,246 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To promote the expansion of Maine's economy through increased international trade in goods and services, and related activities.

What it reported doing in 2024

Technical Assistance & Trade Counseling: The Trade Center assists its members in researching new markets; reviewing trade regulations, tariffs and logistics, and in product sourcing. The Trade Center's staff is committed to providing quality information and practical advice in selecting markets for our members' products and services. There are a number of resources we have available to the public in our Portland Trade Library, and on our website where trade news and current export data is listed. We have extensive internet research capabilities and on-line database services along with internet reference guides that provide our members with timely information on foreign markets.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 81% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 54% for direct work, and 46% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 67.1%; rating input score 67
  • Program expense ratio: 66.5%; rating input score 66
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.47 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 87.6%; rating input score 88; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: -0.9%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.84; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.59; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.7%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.7% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 67.1% of revenue deployed · 66.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 13 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $196K · 13 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 41 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 41 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 39/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 33/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 37/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 13/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.