Minnesota Environmental Health Association Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 237224584
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2017–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2016
- Location
- Anoka, MN, USA
- Phone
- 3202237310
- Rating confidence
- Limited
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $51,598
- Expenses
- $73,792
- Assets
- $81,092
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
12 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Kyle Johnsen (President)
- Amanda Buell (Vice President)
- David Boberg (President Elect)
People named in this filing
- Kyle Johnsen (President)
- Loreena Hilton (Director)
- Greg Nelson (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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To represent the Environmental and Public Health professionals in Minnesota and serve as the state affiliate to the National Environmental Health Association. The objectives of this Organization are to foster and promote high standards of professionalism in the field of environmental health. To promote and support qualifications for engaging in the profession of environmental health, including credentialing of environmental health professionals. To recognize and promote the environmental health professional and the field of environmental health. To encourage cooperation within governmental agencies, private practitioners and institutional practitioners. To provide educational resources to maintain environmental health credentials. To provide communication and networking opportunities for members.
What it reported doing in 2024
Hosted a spring conference, attended by a total of 128 people. And hosted a winter conference attended by a total of 159 people.
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
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 28
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: Limited
- Program expense ratio: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -43%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.1; rating input score 49; 49th 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: -69.7% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -10.2% per year; rating input score 0; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
- Consistency: 5 of 5 current checks pass
- Schedules: 1 filed schedules
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2017 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 49/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.