East Kentucky Power Cooperative

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
610461919
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Winchester, KY, United States
Phone
(859) 744-4812
Rating confidence
Limited

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,277,128,228
Expenses
$1,237,899,580
Assets
$4,201,808,661
Liabilities
$3,378,264,489

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

Leadership & pay

29 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANTHONY S CAMPBELL (PRESIDENT & CEO)
  • DON M MOSIER (PRESIDENT & CEO, EFFECTIVE DECEMBER 2025)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANTHONY S CAMPBELL (PRESIDENT & CEO): $1,910,547 total reported compensation
  • DON M MOSIER (PRESIDENT & CEO, EFFECTIVE DECEMBER 2025): $990,021 total reported compensation
  • CLIFTON E SCOTT (EVP, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $700,590 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

East Kentucky Power Cooperative exists to serve its member-owned cooperatives by safely delivering reliable, cost-competitive and sustainable energy and related services. & Values EKPC’s Mission Statement _EKPC exists to serve its member-owned cooperatives by safely delivering reliable, cost-competitive and sustainable energy and related services._. EKPC’s Mission Statement _EKPC exists to serve its member-owned cooperatives by safely delivering reliable, cost-competitive and sustainable energy and related services._ EKPC’s Values. To maintain reliable electric service, EKPC occasionally expands its transmission infrastructure. Learn about current projects ABOUT EKPC’s TRANSMISSION LINE RIGHTS-OF-WAY.

What it reported doing in 2025

East Kentucky power cooperative exists to serve its member-owned cooperatives by safely delivering reliable, competitive and sustainable energy and related services.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 99% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 78
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 61.4%; rating input score 61; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 3.1%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.39; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.8; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.7%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.7% per year; rating input score 100; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.9M · 29 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $73.7M reported
  • Consistency: 12 of 14 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 32 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 48/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Fund balance restriction sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 17/100.