Missouri Mine Safety and Health Con

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
204745989
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2022
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2022, Form 990-N 2012
Location
Rogers, AR, USA
Phone
3144064114
Rating
39
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Health Program (Includes General Health and Wellness Promotion Services)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$115,189
Expenses
$86,436
Assets
$161,064
Liabilities
$6,238

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

People named in this filing

  • MICHAEL J KUFROVICH (DIRECTOR)
  • STEVE RUDLOFF (DIRECTOR)
  • ROBERT SEELKE (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 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Missouri mine and health conference's mission is to improve the health and safety of miners in the state of Missouri through training and education during an annual conference.

What it reported doing in 2022

The Missouri mine and safety health conference's mission is to improve the health and safety of miners in the state of Missouri through training and education during an annual conference. The conference focuses on best managment practices, new technologies, and behavior-based approaches to reduce the number of deaths and injuries at the sate's mine sites. The confernce is done in conjuction with the south district of teh federal mine safety and health administration within the department of labor, dallas, Texas.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 71
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 25%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.86; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.5% per year; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.2% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.5% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2010 to 2022
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 34/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.