Clay County Historical Society

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237377697
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2021–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2020, Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Clay Center, KS, USA
Phone
7854470282
Rating
46
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$152,541
Expenses
$129,238
Assets
$212,724
Liabilities
$118

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Mike Bulk (President)
  • Marlin Mugler (Vice-President)

People named in this filing

  • Jeff Gaiser (Key Employee-Museum Director)
  • Diana Shaner (Key Employee-Curator of Artifacts)
  • Grace Kensa (Key Employee-Curator of Documents)

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

The purpose of the society shall be to encourage interest in history and the history of Clay County Kansas The societys major function is to discover collect preserve and display historic records and material which may help to establish or illustrate the history of the area The museum is open to the public at no charge Tours are provided for school groups and others Assistance with research is provided

What it reported doing in 2025

0

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue has grown recently. 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: 100
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 15.3%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.65; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 49.9%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -76.7% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.6% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.9% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2021 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 47/100.