Kentucky Public Health Institute

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
464340958
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2021–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Frankfort, KY, USA
Phone
2709299199
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Research Institutes and/or Public Policy Analysis

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$18,750
Expenses
$17,821
Assets
$5,933
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Charlotte Jane Cambron (Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • Charlotte Jane Cambron (Executive Director)
  • Georgia Heise (Director)
  • Cynthia Lamberth (Director)

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

To bridge partnerships and alliances for improved health and quality of life.

What it reported doing in 2025

Providing support to the Region IV Public Health Training Center through Emory University. This includes assisting with identifying opportunities to develop and implement trainings and field placements; identifying three project opportunities per year that address social determinants of health, improve health located at public or non-profit private agencies or organizations in rural and/or medical underserved communities; marketing and promoting Regional IV Public Health Training Center activities that are geared toward state, local and community based professionals and to eligible students pursing degrees in health state/local needs; conducting three trainings geared toward skill area needs and state/local needs; trainings are also geared toward governmental public health workforce throughout the service area.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filed totals do not add up and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 100
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 46
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

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

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 5%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.33; rating input score 24; 24th 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: -29.8% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -30.2% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -19.5% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $19K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2021 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 — Transparency & Controls: Part III program expenses within total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 24/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 53/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.