Polk Vision Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 200141870
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2013
- Location
- Winter Haven, FL, USA
- Phone
- 8636694932
- Rating
- 84
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Economic Development
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $506,806
- Expenses
- $524,406
- Assets
- $763,747
- Liabilities
- $304,010
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
24 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- KIM LONG (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- KIM LONG (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $112,290 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Polk vision actively facilitates a process through which polk county achieves its full potential by identifying and building awareness of community priorities impacting quality of life, education, infrastructure, economic development, civic engagement and government.
What it reported doing in 2024
Polk vision is a broad, community-led partnership of organizations, businesses, government, and indidivuals working to align resources and develop lasting solutions to critical issues facing our entire county. As facilitators of a countywide collaboration among schools, non-profits, businesses and the public sector, polk vision provides the framework for achieving sustained improvement to a range of complex issues. Polk vision volunteer teams have developed a different strategy and a range of tactics to achieve long-term outcomes to increase the high school graduation rate; increase career and college readiness; and improve the health and wellbeing of our community.a countywide outreach was performed with 72 one-on-one interviews held with public, private, and civic leaders to discuss both current and emerging challenges. A series of thirteen focus groups were convened to gather valuable insights and diverse perspectives of residents. Following the focus groups, polk vision sought widespread input through an online survey which was open from may 1, 2024, through june 12, 2024, and garnered the opinions of 3,622 unique respondents.the issues identified by this research are documented and organized within seven interdependent areas of focus. Priorities within each area of focus are tied to identified strategies and data for benchmarking. During a joint session of the polk vision board of directors and its operating board on june 20, 2024, the research results were reviewed and related strategies for improving outcomes were approved. On august 20, 2024, the updated vision was endorsed by the polk county board of county commissioners.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 74% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 80
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 90
- Sustainability: 33
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 91.5%; rating input score 91
- Program expense ratio: 88.4%; rating input score 88
- 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- 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: -3.5%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.46; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.4; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 21.4%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 6.4% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 10% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 91.5% of revenue deployed · 88.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 20 of 20 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $463K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $112K · 24 people listed
- Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 27/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.