Arizona Blue Stake Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
860507180
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022
Location
Tempe, AZ, USA
Phone
6026597503
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,179,131
Expenses
$3,402,064
Assets
$5,363,014
Liabilities
$586,938

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STEVE NICHOLLS (PRESIDENT)
  • SANDRA HOLMES (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • SANDRA HOLMES (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $245,594 total reported compensation
  • BRADLEY SIMON (OPERATIONS MANAGER): $124,124 total reported compensation
  • KENNETH HENSLEY (IT MANAGER): $116,297 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Arizona blue stake, inc. Dba Arizona 811 is a non-profit communication center, which performs excavation notification services and stakeholder education that promotes the safety and welfare of the community by protecting underground facilities from damage.

What it reported doing in 2022

Communicates excavation notifications from professional contractors, the general public, and other excavators to underground facility owners/operators and landlord communities within Arizona to assist in compliance with state law requiring underground facilities to be marked prior to occurrence of excavation activity.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 99% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 61
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 70.4%; rating input score 70
  • Program expense ratio: 65.8%; rating input score 66
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • 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; 64th 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: Pass
    • 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: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -7%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.58; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.3%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.7% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 70.4% of revenue deployed · 65.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $246K · 11 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $241K reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2010 to 2022
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 18/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 54/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.