Battle of Smithland Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
475047092
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2017–2018
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2018
Location
Smithland, KY, USA
Phone
2705194124
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Historical Societies, Related Historical Activities

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,152
Expenses
$3,748
Assets
$2,595

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHAEL S DUNBAR (PRESIDENT)
  • CHRISTOPHER L ROSS (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • MICHAEL S DUNBAR (PRESIDENT)
  • CHRISTOPHER L ROSS (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • STUART C PEEK (TREASURER)

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 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Is to provide living history situations where the public can interact with historians in a time-period setting & in the historical preservation of livingston county Kentucky. Its purpose also included to engage in, sponsor or host events and activities that promotes the preservation of the history of livingston county.

What it reported doing in 2018

Reenactments of the battle of smithland has been held, where the public had interaction with the perticipants in thetime period settings. Informational publications hve been available to groups telling about the activitiesand opportunities available to view and particiate. Speakers havebeen available to groups to promote these activities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 52
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 45.7%; rating input score 46
  • Program expense ratio: 62.8%; rating input score 63

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 27.3%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.69; rating input score 38; 38th 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: -57.6% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -12.9% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 74.2% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 45.7% of revenue deployed · 62.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2017 to 2018
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 46/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.