Chugach Tribal Services

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
933395607
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2023
Location
Anchorage, AK, USA
Phone
9075638866
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$526,072
Expenses
$508,487
Assets
$42,462
Liabilities
$24,877

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KATHERINE CARLTON (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • SHERI BURETTA (DIRECTOR)
  • KATHERINE CARLTON (PRESIDENT)
  • ANNA HOOVER (SECRETARY/TR)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Empower the chugach region and broader Alaska native communities through sustainable development, cultural revitalization, and self-determination.

What it reported doing in 2024

The purpose of this program is to support education initiatives within the state of Alaska that strengthen opportunities and outcomes for Alaska native students. Funding will be directed toward programs that preserve and promote cultural knowledge, improve academic achievement, and enhance access to quality educational resources. This includes partnerships with schools, community organizations, and cultural institutions that are dedicated to advancing educational equity and celebrating Alaska native heritage. Support cultural preservation to sustain Alaska native heritage. Provides burial support services for Alaska natives. Workforce development programs inlcude trainings, internships, apprenticeships, and small business support for Alaska natives in the chugach region.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 66% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 50
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 56.4%; rating input score 56
  • Program expense ratio: 58.3%; rating input score 58
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 92.4%; rating input score 92; 40th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • 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: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.3%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.08; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.59; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 56.4% of revenue deployed · 58.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $297K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 28 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 filed related-organization links
  • 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 56/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 4/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 46/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 13/100.