Friends of the Oro Valley Public Library

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
861033593
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Oro Valley, AZ, USA
Phone
5205310555
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$400,447
Expenses
$290,353
Assets
$518,336
Liabilities
$36,977

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LAURA BROWNELL (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JANE PETERSON (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • THOMAS GRIBB (DIRECTOR)
  • LAURA BROWNELL (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • CHARLENE SWOPE (DIRECTOR)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Friends of the oro valley public library is a volunteer, non-profit organization which exists to encourage and receive gifts, endowments and bequests to the library, and to support the freedom to read as expressed in the american library association's library bill of rights. Support the oro valley public library to enhance our cultural quality of life. Encourage use of library resources and services. Promote the value of the library in the community. Interact with the library leadership and staff. Provide volunteer help. Advocate for the oro valley public library or other general library issues. Assist with programming for life long learning. Raise money to enhance the general library budget. Collaborate with other community organizations.

What it reported doing in 2024

Encouraged and received gifts, endowments, and bequests to the oro valley public library. Supported the oro valley public library to enhance our cultural quality of life.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 63% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 79% of its reported program spending out as 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 66
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 71.1%; rating input score 71
  • Program expense ratio: 97%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 89.1%; rating input score 89; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 27.5%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.79; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 71.1% of revenue deployed · 97% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $281K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 21 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • 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.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.