Chugiak-Eagle River Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
920152780
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Eagle River, AK, USA
Phone
9073517152
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Personal Social Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$29,726
Expenses
$40,697
Assets
$1,077,390
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Kai Binkley Sims (President)
  • Debbie Rinckey (Vice President)
  • John Sims (Past President)

People named in this filing

  • Kai Binkley Sims (President)
  • Debbie Rinckey (Vice President)
  • John Sims (Past President)

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

The Chugiak-Eagle River Foundation, a non-profit organization, is dedicated to improving the quality of life and to address emerging needs in the community of Chugiak/Eagle River, Alaska by providing grants and scholarships from a permanent endowment.

What it reported doing in 2024

Scholarships - Funds expended from the holdings of endowed charitable funds for the sole purpose of making indiviudal scholarships to students from the Chugiak-Eagle River, Alaska area attending enrolled in qualified higher education and vocational programs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 78% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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 the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 54
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 77.2%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 35%; rating input score 35; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 25th 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: -36.9%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 26.47; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.6% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 77.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 12 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $31K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 17 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 35/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 33/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.