Redfield Area Development Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
455463284
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Redfield, SD, USA
Phone
6054721210
Rating
55
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Economic Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$101,276
Expenses
$19,169
Assets
$884,685
Liabilities
$8,763

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Randy Maddox (Vice President)
  • Jill Rude (President)

People named in this filing

  • Todd Fenner (Director)
  • Monte Mason (Director)
  • Dave Willis (Director)

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

To stimulate and expand economic devleopment

What it reported doing in 2025

To stimulate and expand economic, commercial, industrial, and residential development for the area of Spink County, South Dakota.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 87% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - Most voting board members are independent and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 45
  • Transparency & Controls: 58
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 88
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 65.6%; rating input score 66
  • Program expense ratio: 26.1%; rating input score 26
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 81.1%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 46.15; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -13.9% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -22.1% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 65.6% of revenue deployed · 26.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2013 to 2025
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 26/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 40/100.