Friends of Positional Projects

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
333670601
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Llano, CA, USA
Rating
93
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Arts, Cultural Organizations - Multipurpose

Reported finances

Revenue
$35,569
Expenses
$22,965
Assets
$12,604

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Karyl Newman (President)
  • Ann Vanino (Vice-President)

People named in this filing

  • Karyl Newman (President)
  • Ann Vanino (Vice-President)
  • Amy Zhuang (Secretary)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Friends of Positional Projects builds empathy of place in community where Mojave Desert landmarks are at risk reimagining public memory through art history stewardship and technology.

What it reported doing in 2025

In 2025 we began designing and implementing two permanent projects to protect at-risk historic sites in the Mojave Desert. An Indigenous designer and planner visited a sacred site and designed an interpretative kiosk currently in fabrication with a community partner. At a CA State Historic Site we removed 6.9 tons of illegally dumped waste and repurposed 1,300 pounds of materials into a community bench sculpture created by volunteers which deters further dumping and serves as a public meeting place. In 2025 our volunteers served for over 766 hours at 6 events conserving sites where community care impacts enjoyment for all.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 100
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 55
  • 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; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 35.4%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.55; rating input score 33; 33rd 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: 1 filed program accomplishment · $103K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 7 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Part III program expenses within total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.