Manufacturers Resource Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
232514764
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Allentown, PA, USA
Phone
6106284636
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,485,014
Expenses
$4,599,359
Assets
$4,394,580
Liabilities
$1,732,990

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

Leadership & pay

28 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RICHARD HOBBS (PRESIDENT & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOHN COULTER (BOARD MEMBER): $384,726 total reported compensation
  • RICHARD HOBBS (PRESIDENT & CEO): $283,808 total reported compensation
  • SVETLANA TATIC-LUCIC (PROFESSOR): $251,417 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Manufacturers resource center (the center) is a public/private economic development organization operating an industrial resource center under the Pennsylvania manufacturing industrial resource center program. The center provides consulting, training and technology resources, primarily to small and medium sized manufacturers, to enhance their ability to successfully compete in the global marketplace. In addition, the center works with its other economic development partners to encourage regional coordination of economic development efforts and a comprehensive, efficient, economic development delivery strategy.

What it reported doing in 2024

Mrc conducts technical and managerial consulting and training engagements using internal staff and private consultants. Clients are surveyed 1 to 3 years later by an independent organization to determine the economic benefits derived. During the period july 1, 2024 through june 30, 2025, the center engaged in 59 substantive projects with 38 companies and conducted 61 workshops or events with 1,173 participants. During the same period, 93 companies reported $58 million (unaudited) total economic impact, as a result of the center's assistance.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The program-spending lines do not add up, so the filing cannot show reliably whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 94
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 85.8%; rating input score 86
  • Program expense ratio: 82.3%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1,695 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • 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: 90.5%; rating input score 90; 21st 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: -2.5%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.96; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.39; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 29.7%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.2% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 85.8% of revenue deployed · 82.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 19 of 21 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $385K · 28 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $639K reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 35 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 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.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 25/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.