Exchange Club of Las Vegas Nv Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
933010640
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2023
Location
Las Vegas, NV, USA
Phone
7024239967
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Service Clubs

Reported finances

Revenue
$229,434
Expenses
$138,161
Assets
$94,147
Liabilities
$2,817

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jean-Pierre Fallou (President)
  • Marivelle Nunuz-Rucker (President-Elect)
  • James Altwegg (Immediate Past President)

People named in this filing

  • Jean-Pierre Fallou (President)
  • Marivelle Nunuz-Rucker (President-Elect)
  • Brittany Thompson (Treasurer)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

The Exchange Club of Las Vegas is dedicated to strengthening communities through child abuse prevention youth development community service and the promotion of Americanism.

What it reported doing in 2025

The Prevention of Child Abuse service focuses on supporting programs and community initiatives aimed at preventing child abuse. By bolstering family structures through our Parent Aide Program and promoting safe environments for children our efforts contribute to reducing instances of abuse and creating a protective network for vulnerable minors. Through advocacy education and outreach we strive to raise awareness and empower communities to prioritize child safety and well-being.

Operating model

Revenue model
Affiliate-supported. 89% of the money available for current operations came from contributions from related organizations.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 49
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 61
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 44.4%; rating input score 44
  • Program expense ratio: 73.7%; rating input score 74
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 81.8%; rating input score 82; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 52.1%; rating input score 52; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 39.8%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.68; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 187.1% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 199.8% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 44.4% of revenue deployed · 73.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $102K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 32 of 42 current checks pass · 10 findings to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 44/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 52/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Advertising column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX ConferencesMeetings column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesAccounting column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX InformationTechnology column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Occupancy column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OfficeExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Travel column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.