Appalachian Fund Management Company Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 611399975
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2020
- Forms available
- Form 990 2020
- Location
- London, KY, USA
- Phone
- 6068645175
- Rating
- 63
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Economic Development
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $50,054
- Expenses
- $55,736
- Assets
- $0
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- L RAY MONCRIEF (CEO/DIRECTOR)
- GRADY VANDERHOOFVEN (PRESIDENT/DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- BRENDA MCDANIEL (SECRETARY/TREASURER): $468,113 total reported compensation
- GRADY VANDERHOOFVEN (PRESIDENT/DIRECTOR): $276,919 total reported compensation
- L RAY MONCRIEF (CEO/DIRECTOR): $90,122 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The organization serves as the general partner of southern appalachian fund, lp, a new markets venture capital company. As such, it will provide management services to the nmvcc to insure program related cohesive and prudent investments in the appalachian corridor.
What it reported doing in 2020
The organization is a supporting organization for technology 2020, inc. Now known as three roots capital inc., a 501(c)(3) organization and Kentucky highlands investment corporation, a 501(c)(4) organization. Its purpose is the amelioration of poverty through economic development in the appalachian corridor. The organization acts as a general partner to an entity which manages the investments and the contracts for management services to insure cohesive, program related investments.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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 a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 89
- Transparency & Controls: 60
- Accountability: 43
- Sustainability: 23
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 50%; rating input score 50; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 3 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -11.4%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 146.4%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -10.7% per year; rating input score 0; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -10.1% per year; rating input score 0; 36th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -19.7% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 2 of 4 board members independent · 3 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $56K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $468K · 4 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $121K reported
- Consistency: 10 of 10 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 11 filing years from 2010 to 2020
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Related organizations: 4 filed related-organization links
- 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: Independent voting board scored 50/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 48/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.