Little Colorado River Plateau Rc&d

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
860466931
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2010
Forms available
Form 990 2010
Location
Holbrook, AZ, USA
Phone
9285246063
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Natural Resources Conservation and Protection

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$217,227
Expenses
$189,854
Assets
$51,891
Liabilities
$729

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2010. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2010. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To develop and conserve natural resources through project planning and leadership training.

What it reported doing in 2010

In 2010, the little Colorado river plateau rc&d had identified sixty-six tasks to address from the 2010 annual plan of work. Not all tasks were to begin in 2010. Twenty-one tasks were initiated during the year and eighteen of those tasks which were initiated were completed. At the start of 2010, the little Colorado river plateau rc&d had eight project in progress. Thirteen new projects were added during the year and twelve projects were completed. The out come of those projects that were on going, initiated in 2010 or completed in 2010 is as follows. (information & education) agricultural related tours, workshops or seminars-13; forestry related workshops, tours, or seminars-14; community events held-12; training sessions held-9; grant writing training sessions held-1; business development training sessions held-6; environmental educations training sessions held-3; participants at workshops and training sessions-1198; instructors at trainings sessions and workshops-54; newspaper informational media produced-74; newsletter informational media produced-6; publications informational media produced-520; brochure informational media produced-5; display informational media produced-17; electronic media informational media produced-3; total distribution of informational media-3,385: study/plan completed for rc&d area-3. (natural resources) grazing land treated-480 acres; urban lands protected-547 acres; urban lands homes protected-35; invasive species units managed or treated -4; invasive species units treated fish & wildlife-0; invasive species managed or treated area-36; irrigation systems constructed or rehabbed-2; water bodies improved-fish-1; water bodies improved-water quality- 1; water bodies improved area-fish-100 acres; water bodies improved area-water quality- water quality-160 acres; (community & economic development) businesses created-0; businesses expanded-3; businesses retained-16; special forest products farms utilized -1; jobs created-non farm -4; seasonal jobs created-non farm -4; jobs retained-non farm-12; associations formed-4; businesses benefiting from new technology-22; people benefiting from new technology-23; recreational areas improved-1; recreational area improved area- 500 ft.; service provided or improved: grant administration-1; material recycled-93 tons; citizens served-underserved or underrepresented-66; citizens served-socially or economically disadvantaged-136 citizens served-tribal-56; tribal nations served-2.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 96% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 12.6%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.27; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

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

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $145K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.

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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.