Air Camp Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
272186089
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2010
Location
Dayton, OH, USA
Phone
9373045264
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Development Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$916,400
Expenses
$827,654
Assets
$1,512,221
Liabilities
$238,226

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

Leadership & pay

30 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • THOMAS J LASLEY (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • DR VINCENT J RUSSO (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • SHANNON COBLENTZ (DIRECTOR): $115,768 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Deliver an exciting and challenging hands-on adventure in aviation and aeronautics to inspire students and teachers to learn more about science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (stem) while promoting the values of scholarship, leadership, and citizenship.

What it reported doing in 2024

Air camp, inc. Is a hands-on, educational stem adventure in aviation and aeronautics. The focus of programming is to inspire students at the intermediate, middle school, and high school levels as well as teachers and educational leaders across all grades to learn more about science, technology, engineering, mathematics (stem) using aviation and areospace as the medium while promoting the values of scholarship, leadership and citizenship.in 2024, air camp, inc. Held four intermediate school day camp events, two middle school camp events, three high school camp events, two teachers camps, and five 1-day events. During the program year of 2024, a total of 526 students from 31 different states participated in air camp events. Participants are exposed to a broad offering of learning modules for each type of program provided by air camp, inc. With an emphasis on immersing students in engaging educational activities alongside experts.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 73% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 54
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 77.5%; rating input score 77
  • Program expense ratio: 84.9%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.09 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 16th 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: 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: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 9.7%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.83; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.16; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.4% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.3% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 77.5% of revenue deployed · 84.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 29 of 29 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $703K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $116K · 30 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 41/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 35/100.