Hurstbourne Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
743133762
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2015, Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Louisville, KY, USA
Phone
5024201777
Rating
89
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Performing Arts Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$56,660
Expenses
$44,170
Assets
$99,488
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KEITH STELLER (PRESIDENT)
  • GLENN NELSON (VICE PRESIDENT/SECRETARY)

People named in this filing

  • KEITH STELLER (PRESIDENT)
  • AMY JO CONDO (TREASURER)
  • MARY MASICK (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

Organization will develop, preserve and maintain the history of the city of hurstbourne, the hurstbourne country club, the clubhouse and the historical buildings that occupy the grounds. The organization will promote the acquisition and preservation of art and historical artifacts of the club, and buildings on the grounds including the springhouse and the stone slave house. The organization may also donate portions of funds received from their fundraising activities to other 501(c)(3) organizations.

What it reported doing in 2024

Organization served to develop, maintain and preserve the history of the city of hurstbourne.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 90% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 70
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73.2%; rating input score 73
  • Program expense ratio: 93.9%; rating input score 94

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 22%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.25; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.8% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.5% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 73.2% of revenue deployed · 93.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $41K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • 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.

  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.