Southern Illinois Builders Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
370626710
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Ofallon, IL, USA
Phone
6186249055
Rating
50
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,722,399
Expenses
$1,497,993
Assets
$2,688,176
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

23 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RICHARD BOYER (1ST VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MATT FRICKE (2ND VICE PRESIDENT)
  • SCOTT PLOCHER (PRESIDENT)
  • DONNA RICHTER (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • DONNA RICHTER (CEO): $245,052 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 southern Illinois builders association (siba) was formed in 1945, to advance the construction industry by strengthening its members by enabling them to do collectively what they cannot accomplish on their own. It strives to offer a full range of services and programs in an effort to provide value to its members as "the voice of the construction industry in southern Illinois". The siba is headquartered in o'fallon, il and it also maintains a satellite office in marion, il. The siba receives the largest portion of its revenues from membership dues and its online planroom also provides a large portion of its revenues.

What it reported doing in 2025

Siba provides college scholarships to qualified high school applicants who are interested in the construction industry and plan to pursue a degree in civil engineering at southern Illinois university edwardsville.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 85% 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

MIXED - Most voting board members are independent and program spending has grown recently. 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: 21
  • Transparency & Controls: 57
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 23.6%; rating input score 24
  • Program expense ratio: 22.4%; rating input score 22
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • 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: 60%; rating input score 60; 35th 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 13%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.79; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.4%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.2% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 23.6% of revenue deployed · 22.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 22 of 22 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $336K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $245K · 23 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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: Mission deployment rate scored 24/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 22/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 22/100.