Ohio Rural Broadband Association I Cheryl Bostelman

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
262753307
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2014
Location
Okolona, OH, USA
Phone
4197583322
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$97,714
Expenses
$26,586
Assets
$538,402
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

People named in this filing

  • MIKE BOLEY (TRUSTEE)
  • CHERYL BOSTELMAN (TREASURER)
  • NATE BRICKNER (TRUSTEE)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Promotion of the telecommunications industry in Ohio and assist its members to more effectively compete in the provision of telecommunications services to consumers; to promote the common business interests of its members.

What it reported doing in 2025

Competitive support mechanism - public utilities commission of Ohio: to aid local exchange companies having fewer than 15,000 access lines through a market-based transition period; to foster the development and growth of the public utility telecommunications business in all its phases in the interest of consumers for the benefit of the state, its people, and its communities; to encourage efficiency and afford a medium for the interchange of ideas and methods of management so that its members may continually provide the public with adequate, up-to-date and reliable service at reasonable prices; to aid in further developing the Ohio economy and thus promote the general welfare of the nation.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 61% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
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

SUPPORTED - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 50
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 83
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 31.3%; rating input score 31
  • Program expense ratio: 98.4%; rating input score 98
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 72.8%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 20.25; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.4% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 31.3% of revenue deployed · 98.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $26K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 31/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.