Boys and Girls Clubs of Western Nevada

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
880269139
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Carson City, NV, USA
Phone
7758828820
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$12,255,440
Expenses
$4,204,218
Assets
$15,929,540
Liabilities
$645,971

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRETT ZUNINO (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
  • SENA LOYD (PRESIDENT)
  • MICHELLE KETTEN (CO VICE PRESIDENT)
  • KYLE WINTER (CO VICE PRESIDENT)
  • greg dye (past president)
  • Brenda Robertson (past president)

Highest reported compensation

  • BRETT ZUNINO (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $207,300 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To inspire and enable all young people, especially those who need us most, to realize their full potential as productive, responsible, and caring citizens.

What it reported doing in 2024

Mentoring program - the mentor center is a free program offered by the organization and is supported by federal and state grants. Mentors go through extensive background checks and interview process before being matched with a student. The mentor center is the community's original youth mentoring program. It was established in 1999 and currently has nearly 100 active matches in the community the program intends to prevent and reduce delinquent behavior and victimization.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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: 50
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 85
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 27.5%; rating input score 27
  • Program expense ratio: 79.7%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $40.47 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • 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: 95.2%; rating input score 95; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 65.7%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.79; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.9%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.6% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.3% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 27.5% of revenue deployed · 79.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $3.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $207K · 15 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $1.2M reported
  • Consistency: 38 of 39 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 27/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.