Latah Trail Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
820502602
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2013
Location
Moscow, ID, USA
Phone
7074791139
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$26,016
Expenses
$6,102
Assets
$404,543

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARGARET DIBBLE (President)

People named in this filing

  • MATT KITTERMAN (Director)
  • TANYA DENISON (Director)
  • REBECCA CRAFT (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To preserve the historic Moscow-Arrow railroad corridor for non-motorized recreational and transportation uses for Latah County, its residents and visitors, and to provide Latah County and its communities with support to provide this physical connection to their past and open an avenue for their future.

What it reported doing in 2025

Contributed funds were used toward purchase and construction of the latah trail. The trail runs from moscow, Idaho to troy, Idaho and then from troy, Idaho to kendrick, Idaho.

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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 52
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 81
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 23.5%; rating input score 23
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 76.5%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 66.3; rating input score 99; 99th 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: -8.9% per year; rating input score 0; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.3% per year; rating input score 0; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.9% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 23.5% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $6K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 23/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.