Hudson Valley Council Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
141338385
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
Mohegan Lake, NY, USA
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Boy Scouts of America

Reported finances

Revenue
$572,001
Expenses
$771,859
Assets
$4,406,660
Liabilities
$730,686

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

42 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Roland III Peacock (Vice President)
  • Howard Hellman (Past President)
  • William Poole (Past President)
  • Jacqueline Heubach (Vice President)
  • Benjamin Mills (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • David Horton (Scout Executive): $166,041 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the boy scouts of america is to prepare young people to make ethical and moral choices over their lifetimes by instilling in them the values of the scout oath and law.

What it reported doing in 2020

Since 1930, the boy scouts of america has helped younger boys through cub scouting. It is a year round family program designed for boyswho are in the first grade through fifth grade ( or 7,8,9 and 10 years of age). Parents, leaders, and organizations work together toachieve the purposes of the cub scouting. Currently, cub scouting is the lagest of the bsas three traditional membershiop divisions. ( theother are boy scouting and venturing.) in 2018, the council had 3,449 cub scouts, 2,652 boys scouts, and 99 ventures.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 57
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89%; rating input score 89
  • Program expense ratio: 64.8%; rating input score 65
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1.61 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 97.6%; rating input score 98; 26th 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: -34.9%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.71; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.17; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 21.5%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -6.4% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.8% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -5.2% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 89% of revenue deployed · 64.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 41 of 42 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $500K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $166K · 42 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 26 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2010 to 2020
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 3/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 40/100.