Kentucky Dermatological Association Ltd

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
616104843
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2018–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2023
Location
Louisville, KY, USA
Phone
5025835834
Rating
50
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$89,067
Expenses
$64,106
Assets
$179,583
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN STRICKLEY (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • JOHN STRICKLEY (PRESIDENT)
  • GEORGE B SONNIER MD FAAD (SECRETARY-TREASURER)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Providing education for dermatology professionalsmission - the mission of the Kentucky dermatological association is to promote the growth and development of dermatology professionals through education throughout the continuum of care.

What it reported doing in 2025

Our primary purpose is to provide timely education to physicians, especially those practicing in the field of dermatology, in the diagnosis, care, and cure of skin diseases and to promote the best interests of the specialty of dermatology in and about louisville and Kentucky. A statewide conference is held annually and education classes are conducted as part of the conference. The number of persons benefitted annually is estimated to be between 30 and 100. All classes conducted are approved as continuing medical education units by the american medical association.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 91% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Transfer-based 990-EZ. The 990-EZ reports grants or member benefits, but it does not separate enough spending to show the nonprofit’s full delivery mix.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 21
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 73
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 33.7%; rating input score 34
  • Program expense ratio: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 28%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.8; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 15.2% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 33.7% of revenue deployed
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2018 to 2025
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 34/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.