Mclean County Extension Service Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 376060276
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Bloomington, IL, USA
- Phone
- 3096638306
- Rating
- 66
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Agricultural Programs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $65,369
- Expenses
- $48,814
- Assets
- $888,130
- Liabilities
- $256,194
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
11 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- BRIAN BUSS (VICE-PRESIDENT)
- KEVIN BIRLINGMAIR (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- BRIAN BUSS (VICE-PRESIDENT)
- LINDA FAYE WHITE (SECRETARY)
- BRYAN HOFFMAN (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. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Promote and publicize the extension program in agriculture and resource management, 4-h, and youth development, home economics and family development, community resource development, and public affairs. To receive contributions in cash, real and personal property, stock, bonds, etc. For the purpose of supplementing private and public sources of funds for promoting and expanding the extension service program in agriculture, 4-h, home economics, and community development in mclean county.
What it reported doing in 2025
General activities - to promote home economics and youth and provide educational opportunities to persons associated with agriculture. Grant payments made to the university of Illinois trust fund and other recipients.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 91% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 45% for direct work, and 55% for grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 51
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 70
- Sustainability: 66
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 51.9%; rating input score 52
- Program expense ratio: 67.2%; rating input score 67
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 25.3%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 18.19; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.29; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -15.3% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -6.9% per year; rating input score 0; 36th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 6.7% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 51.9% of revenue deployed · 67.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $33K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
- Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2014 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 52/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 10/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.