High Sierra Volunteer Trail Crew

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
571147910
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2013–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2011, Form 990-EZ 2017
Location
Fresno, CA, USA
Phone
5593252874
Rating
44
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Swimming & Other Water Recreation

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$143,365
Expenses
$142,497
Assets
$16,435
Liabilities
$3,375

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAVID GILMORE (President)

People named in this filing

  • DAVID GILMORE (President)
  • RICK FLEMING (Executive Dir.)
  • HONORABLE JAMES R OPPLIGER (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 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Provide the us forest service with volunteer service work primarily for maintenance of public wilderness hiking trails.

What it reported doing in 2017

Environmental reclamation: this program operated year round to minimize the possible exposure of volunteers to the illegal growers of marijuana on public land. We provided federal, state, and local agencies with volunteer labor forces that hiked into remote illegal grow sites and performed necessary clean up and reclamation of damage caused by these illegal growers. We provided over 12,500 volunteer hours in this program.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 20
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 24
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 19.6%; rating input score 20
  • Program expense ratio: 19.7%; rating input score 20

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.6%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.12; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 39.3%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -40.7% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -16.1% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -17.8% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 19.6% of revenue deployed · 19.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $28K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2013 to 2017
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 20/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 20/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 36/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is not authorized to operate as a charity in California.