San Diego North Economic Development Council

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
330706621
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
San Marcos, CA, USA
Phone
7605103179
Rating
38
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public, Societal Benefit

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$491,997
Expenses
$510,665
Assets
$345,354
Liabilities
$3,750

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

Leadership & pay

44 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • WILLIAM ERIK BRUVOLD (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • WILLIAM ERIK BRUVOLD (CEO): $176,358 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 stimulate, improve, develop, and promote the economy of san diego north county through vigorous advocacy in marketing the region for industrial and commercial development and investment. The desired outcome is an increase in job opportunities, as well as an increase in production output and distribution.

What it reported doing in 2024

During 2024, San Diego North Economic Development Council (SDNEDC) directly outreached and provided services to 78 existing north county companies and fielded 25 inquiries from companies outside of North County considering investment. The Council held 5 separate business and education networking events attended by more than 850 North County Leaders. SDNEDC carried out several earned and social media marketing campaigns, resulting in over 205,000 impressions and touch points with audiences interested in North County business news.SDNEDC continued to support STUDENT OPPORTUNITIES FOR CAREER AWARENESS AND LEARNING (SOCAL). SOCAL IS A COLLABORATIVE PROGRAM BETWEEN SDNEDC AND THE CARLSBAD, OCEANSIDE, VISTA, SAN MARCOS, AND ENCINITAS CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE. THE VISION IS TO GIVE MIDDLE SCHOOL, HIGH SCHOOL, POST-SECONDARY STUDENTS, AND TRANSITIONING ADULTS AN OPPORTUNITY TO GAIN INSIGHTS INTO CAREER PATHWAYS, WHILE ALLOWING BUSINESSES AND LOCAL ORGANIZATIONS TO PARTICIPATE IN THESE STUDENTS CAREER EXPLORATION.The council also expanded its research services, producing 13 new reports and fact sheets on a variety of topics, and conducted an economic impact analysis for the E3 collaborative in Encinitas.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 99% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

REVIEW - 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: -3.8%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.68; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 34.5%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 22.9% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 43 of 43 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $176K · 44 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 11 of 12 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 31/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 45/100.