George Washington Carver Birthplace District Assn Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
436048697
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2023, Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Diamond, MO, USA
Phone
4173254151
Rating
48
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$55,286
Expenses
$37,549
Assets
$282,817
Liabilities
$1,140

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LANA HENRY (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • LANA HENRY (PRESIDENT)
  • MICHELE HANSFORD (DIRECTOR)
  • ERIC WELLS (DIRECTOR)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To encourage the scientific, educational, historical and interpretative activities of george Washington carver national monument.

What it reported doing in 2024

Cba managed the park's gift shop and worked to build sustainability through sales, supported park programs and events throughout fy24, managed the park donation account which provided advertising for park events and provided volunteer meals for carver day and prairie day, provided george Washington carver memorial scholarship awards to several high school students, continued historic preservation work on the 1872 neosho colored schoolhouse project, and joined the african american civil rights network. The board remained highly engaged with myriad projects and programs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 90% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 49% for direct work, and 51% for grants.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. 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: 21
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 76
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 17.9%; rating input score 18
  • Program expense ratio: 26.3%; rating input score 26

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 32.1%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.53; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -5.2% per year; rating input score 0; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.3% per year; rating input score 0; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.8% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 17.9% of revenue deployed · 26.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $10K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 18/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 26/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.