North Carolina Industrial Hemp Association Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
472575767
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2014–2019
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2019
Location
Asheville, NC, USA
Phone
8885306731
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$76,083
Expenses
$90,879
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$68,982

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARTY CLEMONS (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • BLAKE BUTLER (EXECUTIVE DI)
  • MARTY CLEMONS (PRESIDENT)
  • AMY BROOKS (VICE PRESIDE)

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 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Hemp was, for almost 200 years, a legal and fundamental crop in North Carolina and should be again. Farmers should be able to grow and consumers buy hemp products grown and processed in our state. Through education we believe that the law of our state can be changed to allow the growing, processing and sale of hemp and hemp products within North Carolina in a responsible manner. Through education, dedication and fundraising North Carolina can be accelerated to the forefront of global growth in industrial and medicinal hemp. North Carolina can and should lead the country in cultivation, processing and support the consumption of hemp's many beneficial products.

What it reported doing in 2019

Nciha provides a legislative effort to legalize the cultivation of industrial hemp in the state of North Carolina in compliance with the federal farm bill of 2014.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 18
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -19.4%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd 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: -33.8% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.3% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2014 to 2019
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.