Las Vegas Chips

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
383971994
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022, Form 990-N 2015
Location
Las Vegas, NV, USA
Phone
7025606584
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,950,030
Expenses
$3,998,314
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ALEXANDRIA ANDERSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR. CO FOUNDER)

Highest reported compensation

  • ALEXANDRIA ANDERSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR. CO FOUNDER): $129,703 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

We work to improve the heath and happiness of our community by improving health care and social service navgation, proving the right service to the right person, at the right time.

What it reported doing in 2022

Rise and thrive programs- Nevada homeless continuum of care - housing program agency reduced 911 usage among referred patients/clients provided transporation to medical and social services providers on at 1000 diverting from reliance on emergency medical service (ems) operation home program - homeless individuals and family - housing first problem solving, trauma and agency ran the first hour resource center where individuals experiencing homelessness could come at at any time

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 100% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 61% for direct work, and 39% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 48
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 14
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90.3%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 89.2%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 75%; rating input score 75; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.2%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: Limited

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 90.3% of revenue deployed · 89.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $130K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 27 current checks pass · 3 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D expense reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D revenue reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.