The National Institute for Hometown Security Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 201869365
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Somerset, KY, USA
- Phone
- 6064513440
- Rating
- 65
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Public Safety, Disaster Preparedness & Relief N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $859,683
- Expenses
- $1,425,313
- Assets
- $1,635,154
- Liabilities
- $34,957
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
9 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JOHN D TAYLOR (CEO)
- MITZI WYRICK (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- JOHN D TAYLOR (CEO): $231,626 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The mission of the national institute for hometown security is: 1) provide national leadership in descovering and developing community-based critical infrastructure protection, 2) facilitate the commercialization of these solutions, and 3) encourage the deployment of the solutions.
What it reported doing in 2024
Generate systems-based critical infrastructure protection solutions and facilitate the commercialization of solutions which support national cip security goals and create efficient, effective and cost-limited cip applications.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 91% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 66
- Transparency & Controls: 66
- Accountability: 90
- Sustainability: 24
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 86.7%; rating input score 87
- Program expense ratio: 51.5%; rating input score 52
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- 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: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -65.8%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.15; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 16.3%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -18% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -15.6% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -12.2% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 86.7% of revenue deployed · 51.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $734K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $232K · 9 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 52/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 47/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.