Clark County REMC
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 350230915
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2020–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Sellersburg, IN, US
- Phone
- (812) 246-3316
- Rating
- 49
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $77,255,931
- Expenses
- $72,180,184
- Assets
- $173,526,905
- Liabilities
- $86,735,908
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
15 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JOHN R BIESEL (PRESIDENT)
- JEFFREY A MYERS (VICE PRESIDENT)
- JASON CLEMMONS (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
Highest reported compensation
- JASON CLEMMONS (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $442,591 total reported compensation
- JEREMY R MILLER (MGR. OF FINANCE & ADMIN./ASST. TREASURER): $312,138 total reported compensation
- NASH SUMMERS (MGR. OF OPERATIONS & ENGINEERING): $265,881 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Board of Directors is the legal body which both the member and the government hold accountable for the actions of the organization.
What it reported doing in 2025
Distribution of electricity to rural consumers.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 96% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 77
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 55
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 6.6%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.4; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.5; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 3%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 5.3% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 5 programs and campaigns described on the official site
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $72.2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $443K · 15 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $6M reported
- Consistency: 13 of 27 current checks pass · 14 findings to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 16 filed money-flow records
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Advertising column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX AllOtherExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX CompCurrentOfficersDirectors column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX ConferencesMeetings column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX DepreciationDepletion column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesAccounting column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesLegal column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesOther column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX InformationTechnology column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Insurance column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Interest column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OfficeExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OtherSalariesAndWages column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 58/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 45/100.