Community Integration of Aviano Organization
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 932005332
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2024–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024
- Location
- APO, AE, USA
- Rating
- 84
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $68,664
- Expenses
- $91,071
- Assets
- $83,250
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Vanessa Slagle (President)
- Skye Jaskulsky (Social Vice President)
People named in this filing
- Vanessa Slagle (President)
- Omar Duque (Philanthropic VP)
- Skye Jaskulsky (Social Vice 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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
CIAOs primary purpose is to provide charitable donations to private organization on Aviano Air Base raise funds through the Aviano Thrift Store for Scholarships donation based store hole one annual fundraiser a year to earn funding for our donations and provide membership events for our members who have paid annual dues to provide welfare and community morale.
What it reported doing in 2024
The 2024 scholarship program gave out Spring scholarships to High school seniors at Aviano High School as well as checks written out to each student of $250 for a class of about 30 Seniors. A Scholarship banquet was also held on their behalf to recognize the winners of the Spring Scholarship program. In the fall we also awarded 5 scholarships to CIAO members who applied. We have a grading panel of non biased individuals within the community grade all scholarships which are scrubbed of applicant information.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 97% 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filed totals do not add up and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 100
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 28
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -32.6%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.91; rating input score 44; 44th 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: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $127K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
- Consistency: 6 of 7 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III program expenses within total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 17/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 44/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.