Russellville Rotary Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
611054815
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2022
Location
Russellville, KY, USA
Phone
2708478441
Rating
37
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$55,075
Expenses
$51,429
Assets
$273,295
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SHELLY HEAD (PRESIDENT)
  • SHANE HAYES (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • CAYCEE SPEARS (PRESIDENT ELECT)

People named in this filing

  • ELIZABETH TEEL (AT LARGE)
  • DAVID POE (SGT AT ARMS)
  • BROOKE WALDRUP (AT LARGE)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To support the russellville rotary club to serve the city of russellville, ky and logan county, ky. The club works on fund raising and projects to support the counties two school systems and their respective family resources youth service centers.

What it reported doing in 2025

"happy feet operation warm" is a program started in 2010 by the russellville rotary club. Russellville rotary club foundation manages and raises the funds for this program. The program works with all 9 schools in our county. In 2024: we purchased 382 pairs of shoes, 461 pairs of jeans, 323 coats and hoodies, and 192 lice kits. These items are distributed through the family resource centers at each of the 9 schools.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and total assets are large relative to annual expenses, but may not be spendable cash. 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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 66
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6.6%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.31; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -88.4% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 56/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.