Climbing Resource Access Group of Vermont Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 820556730
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2023–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2022, Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2023
- Location
- Richmond, VT, USA
- Phone
- 8028255838
- Rating
- 36
- Verdict
- REVIEW
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Parks and Playgrounds
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $65,431
- Expenses
- $67,329
- Assets
- $328,919
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
12 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Mischa Tourin (Executive Director)
- Deane Calcagni (Vice President)
- Matt Bresler (President)
People named in this filing
- Mischa Tourin (Executive Director)
- Steve Charest (Board Member)
- Seth Maciejowski (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
CRAG-VT is a non-profit dedicated to preserving and protecting Vermont climbing. Our work spans from securing access to cliffs, serving climbers and stakeholders as an educational resource, and helping to nurture a responsible and strong climbing community in Vermont.
What it reported doing in 2025
Bolton Parking Win: After summer floods eliminated roadside parking, CRAG-VT worked with the Town of Bolton to regrade space for 6 to 10 cars along Notch Road, improving access to Upper West. Community support also helps CRAG keep the Quarry Road plowed throughout the winter and maintain the leased parking area at Bolton Dome, ensuring continued access for climbers.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 65% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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. 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: 50
- Growth: 20
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: -2.9%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.89; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 49%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -86.6% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -22.9% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd 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 · 12 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- 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 — 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.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 37/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.