Priest River Development Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
820367289
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Priest River, ID, USA
Phone
2084481312
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$220,268
Expenses
$257,235
Assets
$1,396,158
Liabilities
$39,508

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GREG SNOW (PRESIDENT)
  • CHAD SUMMERS (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • KATLYN WARD (EMPLOYEE): $18,443 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To facilitate the diversification of employment opportunities in the priest river area and provide properly zoned commercial property at reasonable costs supporting new business, existing business retention and development of future job opportunities available to the community.

What it reported doing in 2024

Provided support to qualifying community projects charities and existing businesses to assist in employment opportunities and diversification within this rual community. Rental of sites within 31 acre industrial park to active businesses that enoucrage employment activities and increase quality job opportunities in the area. Enhanced economic and business opportunities by supporting new business development and infrastructure improvements within the priest river area. Additional support provided to local chambers of commerce local nonprofits and youth education to encourage further economic growth to nurture future opportunities available to the community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 93% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 53% for direct work, and 47% for grants.

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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 95.2%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 93.1%; rating input score 93; 54th 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: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Limited
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -16.8%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.43; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.2%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.7% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 95.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $245K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $18K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 37/100.