Techstl

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
612026563
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2022, Form 990-N 2022
Location
Saint Louis, MO, USA
Phone
8283476240
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$510,300
Expenses
$500,526
Assets
$123,642
Liabilities
$51,918

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Emily Hemingway Breedlove (Executive Director)
  • Brian Matthews (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Emily Hemingway Breedlove (Executive Director): $87,550 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 TechSTL Council serves as the St Louis champion for technology by strategically and equitably investing in regional collaboration to advance tech workforce development and retention, along with spurring innovation opportunities in existing and new business ventures across the 15 county bi-state region.

What it reported doing in 2024

St. Louis Tech Council. Conducted Regional Node Planning Grant activities to launch the StartupSTL Committee, including hosting the first Startup World Cup and launching construction of the EcoMap Resource Directory for the Startup Ecosystem. Hosted the annual STL TechWeek event with over 8,000 attendees over 5 days, which included 50 events at 30 different venues. TechSTL produced the annual Tech Jobs Report, and Annual Report, and the Impact Report / Sponsorship Kit with regional data tied to our 56 core tech occupations.

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 100% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 27
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.1%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 84.7%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $35.93 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: Pass
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.9%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.25; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.42; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.5%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 42.5% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 52.9% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 24.1% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.1% of revenue deployed · 84.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $424K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $88K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 42/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 11/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 19/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.