Kentucky Dataseam Initiative Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
201482655
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Louisville, KY, USA
Phone
5024199051
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Science and Technology N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,186,341
Expenses
$3,112,277
Assets
$4,133,491
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHAEL BRIAN GUPTON (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • MICHAEL BRIAN GUPTON (CEO): $194,500 total reported compensation
  • JOHN SOWARD (PROGRAM MANA): $130,500 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Dataseam manages one of the most powerful cloud-based high performance computing environments in the world to benefit k-12 education, university research, and workforce and economic development for high technology industries in Kentucky.

What it reported doing in 2024

Dataseam developed and manages a us department of labor-approved registered apprenticeship in information technology with local governance by the Kentucky education and labor cabinet, this 2-year competency based-training requires coursework, on-job training, and mentoring as part of paid employment. Apprenticeship candidates work for their residing district it departments, receiving hands-on instruction that provides context for coursework. At the end of the 3-phase program, completers showing the requisite skills and competencies earn a information technology support specialist certificate from usdol dol.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 97% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 65
  • Sustainability: 67
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69.4%; rating input score 69
  • Program expense ratio: 96%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Limited
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 25.7%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.33; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.4%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.3% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.6% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.6% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 69.4% of revenue deployed · 96% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 3 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $194K · 4 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 47/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 29/100.