Nk Pullers Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 464788250
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2017–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2016
- Location
- Oskaloosa, KS, USA
- Phone
- 7852133378
- Rating
- 85
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Amateur Sports Competitions
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $64,795
- Expenses
- $68,050
- Assets
- $17,680
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- PAT DAVIS (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- PAT DAVIS (PRESIDENT)
- RON ALVERSON (VICE PRESIDE)
- CATHY GUTSHALL (SECRETARY)
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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The goal of this association is to promote truck and tractor pulls by organizing pulls for the benefit of association members, in the state of Kansas and Nebraska, during truck and tractor pull season. 100% of the nk pullers association's time and resources will be spent on promoting truck and tractor pulls. The purpose for which this organization has been organized is to promote truck/tractor pulls in northeast Kansas and southeast Nebraska.
What it reported doing in 2024
The organization attended several pulls within the season. These pulls provide competition, safety, and sportsmanship along with promoting spectator entertainment.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 92% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 100
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 29
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 99.5%; rating input score 99
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -5%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.26; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -4.4% per year; rating input score 0; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -3.2% per year; rating input score 0; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 99.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $68K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2017 to 2024
- 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.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 36/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.