Johnson County Rural Fire District 2

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
710527046
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Clarksville, AR, USA
Phone
4792141114
Rating
89
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fire Prevention

Reported finances

Revenue
$83,342
Expenses
$86,082
Assets
$322,943
Liabilities
$67,177

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BOB BEAN (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • BOB BEAN (PRESIDENT)
  • TAMMY WARREN (SECRETARY/TR)
  • CHRIS CHAPPELL (VICE PRESIDE)

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

Johnson county rural fire district 2 has been organized to establish, maintain and provide fire protection for its members and to acquire and own firefighting apparatus for use by the corporation in the protection of persons and property from injury, loss, damage or destruction by fire; to own and acquire land and to construct and erect buildings for corporate purposes, for the use of the members of the corporation and for the housing of firefighting appartus as well as for the providing of a place of meeting for the members of the corporation. The further objective of this corporation sall be to foster the desires of its members in such a manner as limited in section 501(c)(3) of the internal revenue code.

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 99% 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and liabilities are high compared with assets.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 98
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 96.1%; rating input score 96

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -3.3%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.75; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 25.5% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.1% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 96.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $83K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 14/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.