Knights of Ak-sar-ben Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
470447496
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-T 2025
Location
Omaha, NE, USA
Phone
4025549600
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,928,663
Expenses
$4,137,470
Assets
$10,246,513
Liabilities
$1,830,047

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

Leadership & pay

28 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SANDRA REDING (PRESIDENT)
  • LASHONNA DORSEY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • TIMOTHY H ROBINSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • ANGELA STENGER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • SANDRA REDING (PRESIDENT): $451,776 total reported compensation
  • LASHONNA DORSEY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $293,965 total reported compensation
  • TIMOTHY H ROBINSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $287,129 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To convene business and community leaders committed to Nebraska's prosperity through advancements and innovations in education, workforce development, and civic projects born from effective private, public, and philanthropic collaborations. Aksarben foundation empowers Nebraska's leaders to seize opportunities and channel resources behind collective efforts to grow our economy and improve our quality of life.

What it reported doing in 2025

Advancing workforce development: Nebraska businesses are currently grappling with a pressing issue - a notable shortage of skilled labor. This deficiency is causing a surge in the outsourcing of various positions to other states. The resulting dynamic puts a cap on Nebraska's business expansion and hampers the potential for new businesses considering relocation to our state. However, aksarben is dedicated to addressing this labor crisis. We have pledged to tap into our robust network of business and community leaders, working with Nebraska colleges and universities, and leveraging public, private, and philanthropic resources. Our mission is not only to expand our workforce, but also to enhance the number and quality of high-skill, high-wage jobs, elevating Nebraska's business landscape.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 79% for direct work, and 21% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 92
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 98%; rating input score 98
  • Program expense ratio: 62.2%; rating input score 62
  • Fundraising efficiency: $12.05 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd 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: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.2%; rating input score 98; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 95.5%; rating input score 95; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -41.3%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.48; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.18; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 31%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.2% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 98% of revenue deployed · 62.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 21 of 22 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $2.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $452K · 28 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 36 of 37 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 42/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 37/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.