Blue Ridge Valley Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
010961365
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2015
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Winchester, VA, USA
Phone
5409319522
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Foundations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$17,580
Expenses
$2,718
Assets
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Richard Smith (President)

People named in this filing

  • Richard Smith (President)
  • Michael Hoffman (Sec. & Treas.)
  • Melanie Marks Hitchen (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Blue Ridge Valley Foundation, Inc. will operate exclusively for educational purposes and to foster national amateur sports competition. Events conducted are centered on equestrian sports and are intended to bring together equestrian sports enthusiasts and other to enjoy the sport and activities ancillary there to. Blue Ridge Valley Foundation, Inc. may make distributions, when available, to organizations that qualify as exempt under 501(c)3.

What it reported doing in 2015

The Foundation conducts the Blue Ridge Fall races. The event consists of flat, timber, and hurdle horse races. The races include junior and senior amateur jockeys. The event also includes opportunities for the broader community to watch and learn about equestrian sports in an informal, congenial, and fun atmosphere.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 47
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 15.5%; rating input score 15
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 84.5%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -30.2% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -22.4% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -22.6% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 15.5% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 5 of 5 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2010 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 15/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.