Joshua Tree Shelter

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
800807345
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2017–2018
Forms available
Form 990 2016, Form 990-EZ 2018, Form 990-N 2014
Location
Elko, NV, USA
Phone
7753400667
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Homeless Shelters

Reported finances

Revenue
$5
Expenses
$122,067
Assets
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JENNIFER KIDWELL (President)

People named in this filing

  • JENNIFER KIDWELL (President)
  • TERI LOCKIE (Treasurer)
  • COLLEEN HILL (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 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Joshua tree shelter mission is to provide basic human necessities of shlter, food, clothing, medical care and hygiene to homeless men and women.

What it reported doing in 2018

After serveral years of attempting to raise the capital necessary to construct a homeless shelter in elko, nv, joshua tree shelter determined it would not be feasible to continue with the endeveur.joshua tree shelter, according to its organizational documents, dispursed its remaining cash to organizations in the community that provide support to the under privillaged.the land that was pruchased to construct the homeless shelter has been donated to a local 501(c)(3) that provides recreation and competive sports for the communities youth.

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
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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 7
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 46.3%; rating input score 46

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2,441,240%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd 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: 165.3% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -111.5% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -67.5% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 46.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $56K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 5 of 6 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2017 to 2018
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 46/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.