Purchase Area Development District Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
610703486
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2021
Forms available
Form 990 2021
Location
Mayfield, KY, USA
Phone
2702477171
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Economic Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$14,269,202
Expenses
$13,614,751
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

34 people listed

People named in this filing

  • TODD COOPER (SECRETARY)
  • CATHY PIGG (DIRECTOR)
  • JUSTIN PUCKETT (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. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The purchase area development district (padd) offers a diverse collection of services, touching every aspect of life in the purchase region. Located in the far-west Kentucky, padd services include programs for human support, community infrastructure planning, economic development, and special projects the blending of these offerings provides a well-rounded approach to meeting the current and future needs of our region.

What it reported doing in 2021

The purchase area development district (the "district") supports economic development, gives technical assistance and helps in administering services and programs in the designated eight county jackson purchase area of Kentucky.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 99% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 74% for direct work, and 26% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90.8%; rating input score 91
  • Program expense ratio: 95.1%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 35.5%; rating input score 35; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.6%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.2% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.5% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 90.8% of revenue deployed · 95.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 34 of 34 board members independent · 7 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $12.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 34 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 29 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2009 to 2021
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 35/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 42/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.