Big River Community Land Trust

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
843308249
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-N 2022
Location
White Salmon, WA, USA
Phone
5093103001
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Development, Construction, Management

Reported finances

Revenue
$141,680
Expenses
$144,261
Assets
$2,143,571
Liabilities
$1,924,769

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DOUG BAKER (PRESIDENT)
  • WILLIAM IRVING (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ALYSHA SHERBURNE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ALYSHA SHERBURNE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $86,504 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to develop and steward a stable supply of permanently affordable sustainably built housing which enhances the dynamic character of our central gorge communities.

What it reported doing in 2025

Providing affordable homes for ownership for low- to middle-income households. First home completed at end of 2025 and for sale at start of 2026. Eligible homebuyer is required to be earning less than 120% of the area median income. Expenses include site development construction costs, permits, and legal fees. No revenue has been earned from sale or rental as of december 31, 2025.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 34
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 35.2%; rating input score 35
  • Program expense ratio: 32.6%; rating input score 33
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.15 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: -1.8%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 14.86; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.9; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 60%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -62.6% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 102% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 35.2% of revenue deployed · 32.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $47K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $87K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 35/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 33/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 35/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 31/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.