Mammoth Lakes Recreation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
471070284
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2015, Form 990-N 2013
Location
Mammoth Lakes, CA, USA
Phone
(760) 660-4948
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Environmental Quality, Protection, and Beautification N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,226,906
Expenses
$1,059,431
Assets
$439,002
Liabilities
$44,522

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KIMBERLY ANACLERIO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • CRAIG ALBRIGHT (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • KIMBERLY ANACLERIO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $106,732 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Mammoth Lakes Recreation enhances recreation, arts, and culture through partnership, stewardship, and strategic investment. We leverage public funds, cultivate new resources, and champion programs that celebrate our mountain community and ensure a vibrant, sustainable future.

What it reported doing in 2024

Community building - mammoth lakes recreation works to support and enhance recreation, arts and culture in mammoth lakes through its measure r and measure u allocations program. Mammoth lakes recreation also works to promote diversity within the community within mammoth lakes through outreach and education.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 73% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 92% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.8%; rating input score 79
  • Program expense ratio: 91.1%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: $33.2 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 13.7%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.41; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.1%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 24% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 18.2% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.9% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 78.8% of revenue deployed · 91.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $965K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $107K · 9 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $390K reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 37/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 42/100.