Camp Not-a-wheeze

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
822202008
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Phoenix, AZ, USA
Phone
6023366575
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Asthma

Reported finances

Revenue
$133,667
Expenses
$118,931
Assets
$76,570
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ALAN CRAWFORD (PRESIDENT/CAMP DIRECTOR)
  • ASHLEY FIEGHERY (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • TANYA SAUERHOEFER (DIRECTOR)
  • MELISSA PECAK (DIRECTOR)
  • STEVEN FUCHS (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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Helping kids with asthma manage their asthma

What it reported doing in 2024

Camp not-a-wheeze, a residential camp for asthma education for children. In a traditional camp setting asthma education is integrated with recreational camp activities. This empowers children to understand and avoid their asthma triggers, recognize warning signals of an oncoming episode, properly use their medications, and exercise control over their disease. We serve 7-14 year old children with moderate to severe asthma.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 70% 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 program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 55.3%; rating input score 55
  • Program expense ratio: 62.2%; rating input score 62

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 11%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.64; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.4% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.6% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.1% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 55.3% of revenue deployed · 62.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $74K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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: Mission deployment rate scored 55/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.