Grant County Fair Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
200707381
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2017
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2017
Location
Sheridan, AR, USA
Phone
8709420775
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fairs

Reported finances

Revenue
$31,527
Expenses
$34,925
Assets
$249,636

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHAEL MICHAEL (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • BILL HALE (1ST VP)
  • MICHAEL MICHAEL (PRESIDENT)
  • SCOTT WELLS (AT LARGE)

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 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To educate the citizens of grant county and surrounding areas in the fields of livestock, poultry, crops and home economic activities.

What it reported doing in 2017

Home economics/livestock competition and show: the object is to foster talents and skills in each of the designated areas plus allow participants to develop a sense of personal pride and community support. The livestock portion of the activity also fosters a learning of proper methods of livestock production, record keeping and management practices. The home economics/livestock program has approximately 500 entries. Attendance to view the entries averages 500 to 600 daily during the five day event.

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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 46
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89.9%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 81.2%; rating input score 81

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -10.8%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.15; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.3% per year; rating input score 0; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.7% per year; rating input score 0; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.8% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 89.9% of revenue deployed · 81.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 4 filed program accomplishments · $28K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2010 to 2017
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 29/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.