North Dakota Council of Educational Leaders
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 450358244
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Bismarck, ND, USA
- Phone
- 7012583022
- Rating
- 40
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,401,248
- Expenses
- $1,250,991
- Assets
- $2,312,137
- Liabilities
- $87,853
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
24 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JUSTIN FRYER (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- AIMEE COPAS (EXECUTIVE DI): $276,966 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The North Dakota council of educational leaders was organized to promote future growth and improvement of public education in North Dakota by strengthening the professional efforts of educational leaders through a mutual and cooperative effort. Conventions, conferences, seminars, and meetings are sponsored for the educational development of members and publications are prepared for members' information. Job related legal assistance is available to all members.
What it reported doing in 2024
Organized educational and informational conventions, conferences, seminars, and meetings aimed at fostering the educational growth of our members. Produced publications and resources tailored to our members' needs, focusing on up-to-date information and relevant context. Ndcel has taken a proactive approach in enhancing communication and training across our community. We conduct regular outreach to school leaders through weekly calls, producing valuable documents and guides to support their efforts. Ndcel has also established a method of community outreach and established valuable business partnerships to create a method for schools to establish communication with businesses that can support them.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 96% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
- 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
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: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 60
- Accountability: 79
- Sustainability: 56
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 10.7%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.85; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 22.1%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 9% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 10.6% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
- Leadership: top reported pay $277K · 24 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 12 of 13 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 55/100.