Clark Fork Valley Women In Timber

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
812332959
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2022–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
Location
Superior, MT, USA
Phone
4068222255
Rating
39
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Thrift Shops

Reported finances

Revenue
$70,525
Expenses
$43,496
Assets
$273,907

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Edna Peck (President)

People named in this filing

  • Edna Peck (President)
  • Kathy Verley (Secretary/Treasurer)
  • Jan Allen (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

We are a non-profit thrift store which serves Mineral County, MT. Our entire staff is volunteer. Monies earned through the sale of items are turned into financial donations for our local food bank, three high schools for scholarships, and to the homeless, fire disasters. We also contribute to people

What it reported doing in 2025

Mineral County Food Bank - cash to buy food for those in need.Serves 150 people weekly, 8,400 annually

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 67% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. 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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 72
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 38.3%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.3; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -85.7% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.5% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 7 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2025
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.