North Carolina Economic Development Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
566093438
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2009
Location
Raleigh, NC, USA
Phone
8882462332
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,261,342
Expenses
$1,250,794
Assets
$601,863
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOANNA HELMS (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)
  • GARY LANIER (PRESIDENT)
  • BRITTANY BRADY (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • JOANNA HELMS (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)
  • GARY LANIER (PRESIDENT)
  • BRITTANY BRADY (VICE PRESIDENT)

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

Members of nceda promote the state and their areas as places for new economic activity. The purposes of the association are to: increase the effectiveness of economic developers, promote ethical practices, act as a unified force on matters affecting economic development.

What it reported doing in 2024

To promote professionalism in economic development by increasing the effectiveness of economic developers, promote ethical practices and acting as a unified force on matters affecting economic development. There were approximately 966 members in fiscal year 2025.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 98% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 90% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91.5%; rating input score 92
  • Program expense ratio: 93.6%; rating input score 94
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 73.3%; rating input score 73; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.8%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.48; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13.8% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.8% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.1% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 91.5% of revenue deployed · 93.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 19 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $502K reported
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 22/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.