Skypac Tenant Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
453815443
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2018
Forms available
Form 990 2018
Location
Bowling Green, KY, USA
Phone
2709045025
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,485,689
Expenses
$970,940
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

People named in this filing

  • JAMES KAELIN (CHAIR)
  • DOUGLAS GORMAN (SECRETARY/TREASURER)
  • RICK MCCUE (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 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To acquire real estate and construct a performing arts and entertainment facility in bowling green Kentucky, which will serve the charitable and educational needs of the people of south central Kentucky.

What it reported doing in 2018

This entity, which was designed to support skypac inc (EIN 61-1381629) alongside skypac lender (EIN 45-3814566) held a capitalized lease for assets and the related debt. These notes were forgiven and the offsetting difference for the notes and the book value of the assets resulted in book income of $4,264,540. There was not any cash received but this entity and previously mentioned skypac lender were merged into their supporting organization, skypac inc. Skypac inc is a governmental agency and the building assets had always been titled in that agency's name. This entity was used to hold the debt which was forgiven.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 100% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 42
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 57
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 20%; rating input score 20
  • Program expense ratio: 92.4%; rating input score 92
  • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 78.4%; rating input score 98; 98th 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 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.5% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 58.7% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -18.6% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 20% of revenue deployed · 92.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $897K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 13 of 13 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2013 to 2018
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 20/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.