Rotary Club of Pulaski Tennessee Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
454289795
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2021–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2016
Location
Pulaski, TN, USA
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Men's Service Clubs

Reported finances

Revenue
$48,576
Expenses
$37,334
Assets
$90,371

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Lorie Jones (President)
  • Mary Ann Lewter (President Elect)

People named in this filing

  • Lorie Jones (President)
  • Kelly Woodard (Treasurer)
  • Fran Douthit (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

High Ethical standards in business and professions The recognition of the worthiness of all useful occupations the dignifying by each Rotarian of his occupation as an opportunity for service to society The advancement of international understanding peace through a world fellowship of business professional persons united in the ideal of service above self

What it reported doing in 2024

Multiple agencies in Giles County TN including the Giles County Soccer Park - $5,000 Imagination Library - $2,200 UTS Foundation - $1,000 Rotary Foundation - $5,800 The Boys & Girls Club - $500 The Pouring Spot $500 Student Scholarships $2,500 - along with a variety of other organizations

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 58.6%; rating input score 59
  • Program expense ratio: 72.9%; rating input score 73

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 23.1%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.42; rating input score 70; 70th 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: 40.7% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.7% per year; rating input score 0; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.8% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 58.6% of revenue deployed · 72.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 4 filed program accomplishments · $27K 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: 4 filing years from 2021 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 59/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.