Aacoc Educational Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
481182944
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Atchison, KS, USA
Phone
9133672427
Rating
91
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards

Reported finances

Revenue
$16,092
Expenses
$18,578
Assets
$33,245

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

People named in this filing

  • JILL THORNE (Executive Dir.)
  • BRYCE HUNDLEY (Chairman)
  • COLE SIEBENMORGEN (Vice Chair)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide educational and leadership opportunities for the citizens of atchison county.

What it reported doing in 2025

An annual program to promote leadership, partnership and program opportunities of personal growth, education and leadership skill development to its members and the atchison area. The program introduces students and community members to the leadership networks and dynamics that define leadership in atchison county.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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 reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.1%; rating input score 94
  • Program expense ratio: 81.5%; rating input score 81

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -15.4%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.79; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.7% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.4% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 94.1% of revenue deployed · 81.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $15K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 17 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 25/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.