Richfield Tourism Promotion Board Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
411674890
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Richfield, MN, USA
Phone
6125581671
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Economic Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$155,347
Expenses
$126,043
Assets
$112,244
Liabilities
$744

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RAJ BHAKTA (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • GORDON VIZECKY (PRESIDENT)
  • KATY EPLER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • KATY EPLER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $62,556 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The richfield tourism promotion board, inc. (the board) is a Minnesota non-profit corporation formed in july 1990. The board's purpose is to promote the city of richfield, Minnesota as a tourist destination.

What it reported doing in 2025

The richfield tourism promotion board, inc. (the board) is a Minnesota non-profit corporation formed in july 1990. The board's purpose is to promote hospitality-related businesses, activities, and events for the city of richfield, Minnesota. The board is governed by a seven-member board of directors appointed by the city of richfield, Minnesota. The board is funded by a 3% lodging tax of local hotels and motels, which is imposed by the city of richfield under Minnesota statute 469.190.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 95% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 89% 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 a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 63
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 63%; rating input score 63
  • Program expense ratio: 77.7%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 18.9%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.89; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 49.6%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -8.7% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.4% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -19.5% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 63% of revenue deployed · 77.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $98K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $63K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 17/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 42/100.