Chelan-douglas Community Service Building Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
910966128
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015
Location
Wenatchee, WA, USA
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Coalitions

Reported finances

Revenue
$60,026
Expenses
$19,040
Assets
$374,504
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

People named in this filing

  • NICK YEDINAK (DIRECTOR)
  • JOANNE PALMER (DIRECTOR)
  • DON BOTTOMS (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. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the chelan-douglas community service building association is to acquire or establish, maintain, support, manage and operate a building for the exclusive use of a qualified exempt organization under section 501(c)(3) of the internal revenue code. Since its inception, the association has successfully, owned, supported and maintained a building for the use of a section 501(c)(3) organization located at 620 lewis street in wenatchee, wa 98801. The chelan-douglas community action council has been the primary tenant of this building since the inception of the association.

What it reported doing in 2015

The chelan-douglas community service building association has continually owned, managed, operated and maintained a building for the exclusive use of an exempt organization(s) under section 501(c)(3) of the internal revenue code. 100% of the association's income has been allocated to the continued maintenance and support of the building.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 51
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 84
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 31.7%; rating input score 32
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 68.3%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 19.67; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1% per year; rating input score 0; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 31.7% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $19K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 15 of 15 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2010 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 32/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.