Northern Kentucky Education Council Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
203105862
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2009
Location
Florence, KY, USA
Phone
8592829214
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,120,222
Expenses
$737,957
Assets
$416,182
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • DR RANDY POE (Executive Dir.): $100,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Strengthen, unite, and mobilize education, business and community partners in Northern Kentucky to advance student success and wellbeing from early childhood through post-secondary/career.

What it reported doing in 2024

Chinese Language ProgramIn 2011, the University of Kentucky started its Mandarin Language and culture program for K-12 students throughout the state of Kentucky. In 2020, the university of Kentucky closed its K-12 program and it was transferred to the northern Kentucky Coop since the Kentucky department of education had cut its foreign language program. Eventually the program landed at the Northern Kentucky Education Council.Since the programs inception, over 250,000 Kentucky elementary students have been exposed to an early acquisition of a foreign language. This early acquisition impacts brain development and this is the main goal for the program.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 82% 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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. 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: 37
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 62
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 34.8%; rating input score 35
  • Program expense ratio: 52.8%; rating input score 53
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 34.1%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.56; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.6%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -6.7% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 34.8% of revenue deployed · 52.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 18 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $390K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $100K · 18 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 35/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 53/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 26/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 26/100.