Kentucky Association of Counties Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
610870248
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Frankfort, KY, USA
Phone
5022237667
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$10,191,451
Expenses
$8,683,836
Assets
$31,039,420
Liabilities
$4,374,761

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

Leadership & pay

52 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ADAM O'NAN (PRESIDENT-ELECT)
  • AMY CHANDLER (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • DAN MOSLEY (PRESIDENT)
  • MICHAEL LOGSDON (FIRST VICE-PRESIDENT)
  • TABATHA CLEMONS (FIRST VICE-PRESIDENT (TO 12/24))
  • JAMES HENDERSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • JAMES HENDERSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/CEO): $387,110 total reported compensation
  • TIMOTHY STURGILL (GENERAL COUNSEL): $275,744 total reported compensation
  • TEMPLE JUETT (DIRECTOR OF INSURANCE): $270,611 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 Kentucky association of counties (kaco) is dedicated to serving all Kentucky counties by providing the highest quality programs/services and advocating legislative solutions for Kentucky's counties both today and tomorrow.

What it reported doing in 2024

To improve and enhance Kentucky's 120 county governments and their political subdivisions through educational programs, cooperative undertakings, and issue advocacy.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 90% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 50
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 89
  • Sustainability: 67
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 55.1%; rating input score 55
  • Program expense ratio: 57.9%; rating input score 58
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 14.8%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.57; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.14; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 28.9%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.7% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 55.1% of revenue deployed · 57.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 32 of 36 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $387K · 52 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $120K reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 51 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 6 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 55/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.