Metro Louisville Harm Reduction Task Force

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
472915414
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2016
Location
Louisville, KY, USA
Phone
5025376061
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,266,916
Expenses
$1,627,807
Assets
$443,859
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • HENRY LUCAS (CHAIR): $37,895 total reported compensation
  • LYNNE HUCKLEBERRY (TREASURER): $21,020 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 mission of the coalition is to reduce substance abuse overdoses and deaths, the stigma associated with addiction, and to offer harm reduction solutions which include improving public health in Kentucky.

What it reported doing in 2024

Mobile outreach supporting the community by providing harm reduction services such as increased access to naloxone, harm reduction supplies, education and supplies, syringe service programs, and access to onsite medication for opioid use disorder (moud) telehealth. The moud services including psychiatric care, case management, access to treatment for substance use disorder (sud), family support services, and education. The Kentucky harm reduction coalition works in conjuction with the louisville recovery community connection, seven counties services, and the university of louisville school of medicine department of psychiatry.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 96
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 24
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 94.7%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: $53.35 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -28.5%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.27; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.6%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 27.8% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 27.4% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 29% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 94.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 7 filed program accomplishments · $1.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $38K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 6/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 13/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule G fundraiser detail did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.