Fort Campbell Historical Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
621516963
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Ft Campbell, KY, USA
Phone
9314312617
Rating
87
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Environmental Quality, Protection, and Beautification N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$21,137,687
Expenses
$33,317,860
Assets
$9,641,399
Liabilities
$1,295,393

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRIAN WINSKI (PRESIDENT/CE)

Highest reported compensation

  • BRIAN WINSKI (PRESIDENT/CE): $200,000 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 purpose of the fort campbell historical foundation is to educate, honor, and inspire through the extraordinary history and service of the 101st airborne division, the 5thspecial forces group & 160th special operations aviation regiment, and honor the sacrifice of soldiers and inspire citizens to a life of service to their country.

What it reported doing in 2025

Support and promote the Tennessee wings of liberty museum. This includes coordinating all aspects of the fundraising and construction of the new Tennessee wings of liberty military museum and its exhibits. It also includes establishing robust education programs and partnerships and operating a museum gift shop.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 65% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

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

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 99
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 20
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 98.2%; rating input score 98
  • Fundraising efficiency: $611.57 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -57.6%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.29; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.6%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 52.8% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 46.2% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.7% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 98.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $32.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $200K · 18 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $15.7M reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2016 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.