North Dakota Rural Rehabilitation Corp

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
456002345
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Bismarck, ND, USA
Phone
7012235810
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,613,985
Expenses
$1,493,499
Assets
$99,686,275
Liabilities
$12,648

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • WILLIAM FORTIER (PRESIDENT)
  • JASON SILLERS (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • TERESE BERG TERM MARCH 2024 (BUSINESS MANAGER): $131,165 total reported compensation
  • WILLIAM FORTIER (PRESIDENT): $75,728 total reported compensation
  • KENNETH L DALSTED (SEC./TREAS.): $68,401 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 rural rehabilitation corporation is a charitable non-profit, charitable corporation committed to providing low interest loans and grant to qualifying North Dakota farmers, ranchers, cooperatives, non-profit and public entities, the primary purpose of which is to assist in the development, rehabilitation and enhancement of the economic, education, social, infrastructure and public safety opportunities in their individual operations and their rural North Dakota communities in a manner that adds to the quality of life of low income farmers, ranchers and other low income rural residents and is consistent with its corporate authority.

What it reported doing in 2024

Real estate loans--nd rural rhabilitation corporation (ndrrc) participates with the farm service agency (fsa) in providing real estate loans to North Dakota farmers and ranchers who are unable to secure conventional credit. These loans have been for borrowers with fsa loans where fsa subordinates their lien to this corporation. Ndrrc also provides direct real estate loans to farmers and ranchers who are unable to secure conventional credit. Some of these loan requests are submitted by credit counselors on behalf of their clients and some farmers and ranchers come directly to the corporation themselves. The loans may involve refinance or existing first mortgage loans which are either being terminated or have such high interest rates that the operators no longer have an adequate cash flow to succeed. Loans for the purchase of land are also made. Ndrrc requires a first mortgage.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 76% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most filed governance safeguards are in place. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 33
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 71
  • Sustainability: 87
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 12.8%; rating input score 13
  • Program expense ratio: 76.9%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.2%; rating input score 99; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 50%; rating input score 50; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 80.4%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 66.75; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 28.9%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.7% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.9% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.4% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 12.8% of revenue deployed · 76.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 6 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $131K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 14 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 13/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 50/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.