Eastern Madera County Fire Safe Council Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
912164658
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2017, Form 990-N 2022
Location
Coarsegold, CA, USA
Phone
5592720567
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fire Prevention

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$709,817
Expenses
$541,868
Assets
$394,076
Liabilities
$4,756

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jon Cottington (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Ashely Nebeker (Executive Dir.): $61,832 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Planning and participation in activities to increase safety and reduce fire hazards in the Eastern Madera County area.

What it reported doing in 2025

The Eastern Madera County Fire Safe Council implemented shaded fuel breaks and roadside treatments, the advancement of innovative approaches such as prescribed grazing and wood utilization programs and expanded support for residents working toward defensible space compliance.- Advanced the Mountain Area Strategic Treatments (MAST) Suite to guide prioritized, landscape-scale fuels reduction and investment planning.- Pro-actively aligned EMCFSC strategy with State and Federal resilience priorities through active participation in statewide and regional planning efforts.- Developed a centralized GIS-based project database and mapping system to improve project tracking and decision-making.- Prepared six landscape-scale projects for competitive funding, expanding the pipeline of implementation-ready treatments.- Developed targeted partnerships to address regional gaps in planning, funding, and implementation capacity.- Established a public-facing wildfire resilience office at the Madera County Government Center through FAM Co initiative.- Created the WUI Community Protection Plan, a suite of 13 projects that will protect forest-adjacent medium to high density neighborhoods through targeted vegetation treatments.- Supported 30 homeowners in achieving PRC 4291 compliance through direct vegetation treatment assistance.- Launched a region-wide roadside chipping program to reduce hazardous fuels.- Delivered property-level wildfire risk assessments using Fireaside as a CAL FIRE qualified DSA entity.- Developed implementation-ready actions plans for four regional fuel breaks.- Implemented a 17-acre shaded fuel break protecting a high-risk WUI community in Bass Lake.- Partnered with PG&E to develop an innovative wood-removal pilot program.- Engaged community members through 20+ outreach events.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 66% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 88% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 89
  • Accountability: 6
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 74.3%; rating input score 74
  • Program expense ratio: 97.3%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 6th 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 23.7%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.73; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.4%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.8% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 74.3% of revenue deployed · 97.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 5 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $527K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $62K · 7 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $131K reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 34/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.