Grow Hays Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
863210986
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Hays, KS, USA
Phone
7856283102
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Improvement, Capacity Building N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,711,571
Expenses
$733,205
Assets
$11,460,082
Liabilities
$1,384,546

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • DOUG WILLIAMS (Executive Dir.): $174,976 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To retain & attract employment and investments in a diversified local economy consistent with community economic development priorities. Seek funding through federal, state, and foundation grants to create training programs and facilities to meet industry needs for skilled workers to train underemployed and unemployed individuals; serve as a catalyst to attract private investment to develop affordable housing; foster education research in areas of agriculture science, bioscience, and alternative energy; and develop programs consistent with the goal of preventing community deterioration. The organization is committed to ensuring economic vitality & innovation to enhance the community & quality of life for citizens of hays and the surrounding communities.

What it reported doing in 2024

The organization is committed to ensuring economic vitality & innovation to enhance the community & quality of life for citizens of hays and the surrounding communities. It helps hays and the surrounding communities with business expansion/retention, business recruitment, entrepreneurism & marketing. The organization seeks funding through federal, state, and foundation grants to create training programs and facilities to meet industry needs for skilled workers and to train underemployed and unemployed individuals.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 84% 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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 36
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 81
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 14%; rating input score 14
  • Program expense ratio: 85.1%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 10th 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: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • 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: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 23rd 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: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 84.4%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 15.63; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 23.9%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 19.1% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 29.9% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 50% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 14% of revenue deployed · 85.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 14 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $624K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $175K · 14 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 14/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 55/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.