Casper Mountain Biathlon Club

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
270653711
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2021
Forms available
Form 990 2021, Form 990-N 2010
Location
Casper, WY, USA
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Winter Sports

Reported finances

Revenue
$165,369
Expenses
$185,716
Assets
$351,782
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KEVIN BITTENBENDER (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ROBERT ROSSER (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • KEVIN BITTENBENDER (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ROBERT ROSSER (PRESIDENT)
  • STEVE HERNANDEZ (BOARD MEMBER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Casper mountain biathlon clubs mission is to provide opportunity and training for youth and adults of all abilities to achieve excellence through the sports of cross country skiing and rifle marksmanship.

What it reported doing in 2021

Adaptive biathlon, programs specifically for veterans with disability. Cmbc offered four 5-day camps for adaptive athletes. Cmbc also trains local paralympic athletes on a year-round basis, as well as hosting and training individual athletes throughout the year. Adaptive programs also include outreach efforts to regional veteran centers and adaptive organizations. Casper mountain biathlon club is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization, a designated paralympic sport club, u.s. Ski and snowboard club and a member club of the u.s. Biathlon association.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 100% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 52
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 91.4%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -12.3%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.89; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -14.8% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.6% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 91.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $170K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2011 to 2021
  • 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.

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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.