Scottsville-allen County Industrial

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
611200089
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2012
Forms available
Form 990 2012
Location
Scottsville, KY, USA
Phone
2702373169
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$145,224
Expenses
$141,951
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2012. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2012. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the organization is to identify, negotiate and finance the inclusion of new industries to the community and assist existing industries to meet needs that will benefit the community.

What it reported doing in 2012

During the fiscal year ended, the industrial development authority continued its efforts to attract new industry to the scottsville/allen county area and bolster existing industries.

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

- 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: 92
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 28
  • 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; 60th 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: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • 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: 2.3%; rating input score 50; 50th 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: 11.3%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -7.2% per year; rating input score 0; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -21.1% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $127K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $56K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2009 to 2012
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 50/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.