Mills County Economic Development Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
421301658
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2016
Location
Glenwood, IA, USA
Phone
7123027010
Rating
53
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$220,799
Expenses
$179,191
Assets
$501,708
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JON LORSON (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • JON CARLO (DIRECTOR)
  • ALAN DEBOLT (DIRECTOR)
  • JODI EVANS (DIRECTOR)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mills county economic development foundation, inc. (mcedf) will conduct its activities to promote the purposes for which it was organized as set forth in the articles of incorporation. The organization will be under the guidance of the mills county board of supervisors (mcbos). Additionally, the purpose of the foundation is to effectively advance a focused economic development growth agenda to enhance, position and market mills county as a preferred business location. Our goal is to advance the interest of mills county and improve business climate and economic conditions. Our agenda for growth will lead to the retention and expansion of existing firms, the attraction and startup of high value firms and long term growth and vitality of the county. This will be accomplished in collaboration and cooperation with our public and private partners within the county, region, and state. No part of the net earnings of the foundation shall inure to the benefit of or be distributable to its di

What it reported doing in 2024

Continuously build education and relationships with prospects, site selectors, utility partners and other professionals in the economic development industry.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 97% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

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: 21
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 71
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 21.7%; rating input score 22
  • Program expense ratio: 26.4%; rating input score 26
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 18.8%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.8; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.6% per year; rating input score 0; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.3% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 21.7% of revenue deployed · 26.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $47K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 22/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 26/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.