St Louis Council of Construction Consumers

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
430968213
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022
Location
Ballwin, MO, USA
Phone
6363946200
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Reported finances

Revenue
$558,463
Expenses
$464,854
Assets
$636,548
Liabilities
$254,009

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

30 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARK WINSCHEL (PRESIDENT)
  • KELLY JACKSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • Anna Leavey (2ND VICE PRESIDENT)
  • Kevin Studer (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • RICHARD UNVERFERTH (1ST VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • KELLY JACKSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $98,219 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The slc3 is a community of design and construction industry professionals with a common interest in the betterment of our region through prioritizing innovation, continuing education, equity empowerment and all-inclusive workforce collaboration. Our community includes owners, designers, consultants, contractors, developers, trades, legal counsel, accounting, banking, insurance, marketing and other service providers.

What it reported doing in 2022

Membership programs and events are developed to provide to bring together all stakeholders in the architecture, engineering and construction industry for the purpose of collaborating, building relationships, learning about projects being built or new technology, to provide open conversations about key issues such as diversity, equity, and inclusion, health and safety, and workforce challenges. There were 15 events classified as membership or networking related.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 57
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 59.9%; rating input score 60
  • Program expense ratio: 71.9%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 16.8%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.37; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.4; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 21.1%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.3% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 59.9% of revenue deployed · 71.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 27 of 27 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $98K · 30 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 23 current checks pass · 7 findings to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2022
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesAccounting column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OtherEmployeeBenefits column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OtherSalariesAndWages column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX PayrollTaxes column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX PensionPlanContributions column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Travel column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.