Johns Creek Convention & Visitors Bureau

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
262314958
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Johns Creek, GA, USA
Phone
4043702044
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Reported finances

Revenue
$331,276
Expenses
$315,651
Assets
$146,968
Liabilities
$18,472

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KATHRYN LAITY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • KATHRYN LAITY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $50,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The organization is official destination marketing organization of johns creek, Georgia. Their mission is to serve as an economic catalyst by marketing the city as a destination for business and leisure travel.

What it reported doing in 2024

Tourism promotion pursuant to the official code of Georgia annotate 48-13-51-a5 the johns creek convention and visitors bureau expended funds for the purpose of promoting tourism. Specific projects and marketing campaigns included sponsorship of events in johns creek special event wedding venue promotion including organizing a wedding expo advertising the knot facebook travel guide by the atlanta magazine promotion of culinary arts tourism advertising in the culinary guide by atlanta magazine.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 31
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 81.8%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 85.8%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $18.84 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 7th 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: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.7%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.47; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.8%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 27.2% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.7% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 81.8% of revenue deployed · 85.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 7 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $271K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $50K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 56/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 50/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 24/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.