Friends of Dangberg Home Ranch
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 275385237
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2021–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2020, Form 990-N 2012
- Location
- Minden, NV, USA
- Phone
- 7757839417
- Rating
- 73
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Public Foundations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $200,949
- Expenses
- $234,054
- Assets
- $206,328
- Liabilities
- $916
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Mark Jensen (Executive Director)
- Karen McGee (President)
- Melanie Boudreau (Vice-president)
Highest reported compensation
- Mark Jensen (Executive Director): $62,221 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The mission of Friends of Dangberg Home Ranch is to protect and share the resources of the Dangberg Home Ranch Historic Park to promote understanding of Carson Valley's agricultural history and to provide arts and cultural opportunities as a public park.
What it reported doing in 2024
Education Programs. Friends of Dangberg employs an education specialist is responsible for developing educational programs for youth, with an emphasis on third and fourth grade students in public, private, and home schools. In 2024-25, 499 youth (along with 209 accompanying adults) participated in structured field trips to the park, where they learned about ranching in the past, or they attended additional scheduled programs including a kite-flying weekend, agricultural heritage day, Western heritage reading, photography, and gardening events. In addition, staff made several in-school presentations focused on local history and living history portrayals (Chautauqua).
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 52% for direct work, and 48% for grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 78
- Transparency & Controls: 68
- Accountability: 84
- Sustainability: 26
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 87.6%; rating input score 88
- Program expense ratio: 74.7%; rating input score 75
- Fundraising efficiency: $8.96 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 13.7%; rating input score 14; 38th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- 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: -16.5%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.88; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 26.6%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -23.5% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 9.5% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 12.1% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 87.6% of revenue deployed · 74.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $175K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $62K · 10 people listed
- Consistency: 42 of 43 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2021 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 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 — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 14/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 36/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 37/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 50/100.