Dream Big Nevada

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
822765806
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2019, Form 990-N 2018
Location
Las Vegas, NV, USA
Phone
7026400066
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Ethnic, Immigrant Centers

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$83,369
Expenses
$90,188
Assets
$29,886
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ASTRID SILVA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ASTRID SILVA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $29,423 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide aid to nevadas immigrant families through direct services and by empowering community members to advocate for themselves and other in similar situations

What it reported doing in 2024

DACA Education Campaign: In 2019 the Supreme Court heard the oral arguments for the DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals). We were told that the decision for the case would come in 2020. As part of our DACA Education Campaign, we were able to purchase equipment to film videos of our DACA recipients expressing how DACA had changed their lives. We were also able to begin a Facebook Live weekly video, in which we kept our DACA recipients and their families informed about the progression of the Court. On March 3rd, we began to wait for the decision that ultimately came on June 18th, 2020. Once the decision was announced and was in favor of DACA recipients, we were able to quickly inform those who had signed up of what was happening and for a brief period of time some were able to apply for the program. As the decision was contested, in Dec,2020 we were made aware that the decision had been upheld; Again we were able to reach out to to reach out to eligibles.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 73% for direct work, and 27% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91.3%; rating input score 91
  • Program expense ratio: 84.4%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $15.47 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

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: 75.7%; rating input score 76; 50th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -8.2%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.33; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 32.6%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -31.3% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -27.5% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -16.5% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 91.3% of revenue deployed · 84.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $76K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $29K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 47/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.