Inter Tribal Long Term Recovery Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
264135895
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2023
Location
Valley Center, CA, USA
Phone
7604732012
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Disaster Preparedness and Relief Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$202,472
Expenses
$141,952
Assets
$31,217
Liabilities
$250

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Laurie Gonzalez (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Anthony Ravago (Chairman)
  • Laurie Gonzalez (Vice President)
  • Robert Smith (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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of itltrf is to strengthen and enhance the coordination of area wide disaster recovery efforts on tribal lands located in san diego county affected by wildfires and other disasters by working with tribal, federal, state, and local government agencies to 1 share disaster relief information 2 simplify access to disaster relief services, and 3 provide mutual assistance to tribal communities that have experienced natural disasters.

What it reported doing in 2024

The organization provides the community with disaster education workshops and or training to tribal groups and or others within the boundaries of san diego county. Coordinates and hosts a county-wide disaster preparedness conference to coordinate disaster planning, preparedness, response and recovery. Enhances emergency communications capabilites. Coordinates county-wide inter-tribal disaster exercise to assess its level of disaster preparedness and communications and response capabilites. Increases capacity to handle future disasters and or other emergencies through development of partnerships, memorandums of understanding, statements of understanding and or other methods. The main geographic area where the community disaster education and preparedness is served is on tribal lands within the boundaries of the county of san diego. The beneficiaries of project activities are primarily tribal members, visitors to tribal lands as well as residents of the county of san diego.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 84% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 65% for direct work, and 35% for grants.

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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 78
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 66.4%; rating input score 66
  • Program expense ratio: 94.8%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 51.6%; rating input score 52; 43rd 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: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: 29.9%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.22; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -8.7% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.8% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -7.2% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 66.4% of revenue deployed · 94.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $135K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 52/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 47/100.