Scioto County Poultry Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
201034277
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Lucasville, OH, USA
Phone
7403722802
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Animal Husbandry

Reported finances

Revenue
$-80,814
Expenses
$0
Assets
$418
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAYLENE BENTLEY (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • CHARLES WOODS (BOARD MEMBER)
  • AARON CARKEEK (BOARD MEMBER)
  • TIM CHAMBLIN (BOARD MEMBER)

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 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Encourage the breeding & exhibiting of poultry among the breeders & fanciers of all types of poultry & waterfowl.

What it reported doing in 2016

Poultry shows held two times a year. Encourage the breeding & exhibiting of poultry among the breeders & fanciers of all types of poultry & waterfowl.

Operating model

Revenue model
No positive adjusted resources. The filing reports no positive adjusted operating resources.
Distribution model
No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 25
  • Sustainability: 17
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 33.3%; rating input score 33; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -100%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: Limited
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: Limited

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -140% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: -99.1% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 4 of 12 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 11 of 11 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2014 to 2016
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 33/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 19/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.