Sunrise County Economic Council

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
010493897
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Machias, ME, USA
Phone
2072550983
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Urban, Community Economic Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,504,162
Expenses
$5,403,480
Assets
$7,666,472
Liabilities
$1,724,759

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • CHARLES J RUDELITCH (EXECUTIVE DI): $165,057 total reported compensation
  • GABRIELA MONTOYA-EYERMAN (FINANCE DIRE): $121,318 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The scec initiates and facilitates the creation of jobs and prosperity in Washington county, Maine by working with a consortium of community-minded businesses, not-for-profit organizations, municipalities and citizens.

What it reported doing in 2024

Sustainable prosperity initiative - this project is a team focusing on the prosperity of the communities and environmental issues in the Washington county downeast region in relation to several program areas. The sipayik clam garden, revitalizing native foodways; the ropeless gear library pilot, testing ropeless lobster gear working to prevent sea life rope entanglement; the upper machias bay resilience project, working on machias bay environmental issues; along with the downeast fisheries partnership, a collaboration of fisheries related non-profit work as well as fisheries educational programming, are all part of this community work.

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 93% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 66
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 61.7%; rating input score 62
  • Program expense ratio: 96.7%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 36.5%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.42; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.22; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.3%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 18.2% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 17.9% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.5% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 61.7% of revenue deployed · 96.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $5.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $165K · 16 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $154K reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 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.

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 8 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 50/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.