Cumberland River Compact Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
621709756
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Nashville, TN, USA
Phone
6158371151
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management

Reported finances

Revenue
$9,590,444
Expenses
$6,667,853
Assets
$35,943,066
Liabilities
$27,866,845

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

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MEKAYLE HOUGHTON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MEKAYLE HOUGHTON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $174,231 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To enhance the health and enjoyment of the cumberland river and its tributaries through education, collaboration and action.

What it reported doing in 2024

Stream restoration projects strive to improve water quality by restoring streams and waterways throughout the cumberland river basin. The organization also operates a compensatory mitigation stream restoration in-lieu fee (ilf) program whose purpose is to satisfy compensatory mitigation requirements for permits issued under the clean water act. The objectives of this program are to implement effective stream restoration, enhancement, establishment and preservation projects to compensate for the loss of ecological functions affected by permitted activities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 68% 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 - Most voting board members are independent and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 59
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 74
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 49.5%; rating input score 50
  • Program expense ratio: 85.1%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.6 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 30.5%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.39; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.78; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.6%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 24% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 23% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 25.5% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 49.5% of revenue deployed · 85.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 21 of 21 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $5.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $174K · 21 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $1.2M reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 50/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 11/100.