Dugger Union Community Schools Corp

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
464351497
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Dugger, IN, USA
Phone
8126487109
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,483,112
Expenses
$7,674,953
Assets
$6,444,308
Liabilities
$573,792

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KYLEE KNOEPFLE (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • GINA LOVELACE (MEMBER)
  • CARRI HOWARD (MEMBER)
  • KYLE FOLI (MEMBER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

The corporation shall develop and operate one or more schools to prepare young people for productive lives. The mission of dugger union community schools is to uncover, recover, or discover the unique skills and talents that each child brings to school every day. Our school works collaboratively with families, community members, and all parts of the greater community to solve real problems. Students graduate from dugger union community schools with the will, skill, capacity, and knowledge to take responsibility for contributing to the greater good of their community and as stewards of the environment.

What it reported doing in 2024

The operation of a charter public school serving dugger, Indiana.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 96% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 98%; rating input score 98
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2.6%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.84; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16.6% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.7% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.3% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 98% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $7.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 25/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D land buildings reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.