Michigan Horse Council Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
382571230
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Lansing, MI, USA
Phone
7348466898
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$367,182
Expenses
$330,151
Assets
$324,091
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JULIE POOLER (PRESIDENT)
  • MELISSA DEWITT (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • LENA EDSON (DIRECTOR)
  • RENEE EVOY (DIRECTOR)
  • TREVOR WALTON (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. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Michigan horse council, inc. Is organized for the purposes of educating, supporting, encouraging, supplementing and coordinating the efforts of those presently engaged in the constructive conservation, development and promotion of the horse industry and the horse community.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Michigan horse expo, held annually, is a venue of educational programs featuring speakers, seminars, clinics, demonstrations, a youth rodeo, and various other events for the benefit and education of the horse community and other horse organizations and to advocate the conservation and promotion of the horse community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 91% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% 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 assets have declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 81.9%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 93.2%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 75%; rating input score 75; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 10.1%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.98; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.1% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 81.9% of revenue deployed · 93.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $308K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 40/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.