MatSu Valley Planning for Transportation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
331271929
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2023
Location
Palmer, AK, USA
Phone
9079829080
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Energy Resources Conservation and Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$760,859
Expenses
$192,958
Assets
$608,225
Liabilities
$40,324

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Kim Sollien (Director): $51,895 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

MatSu Valley Planning for Transportation (MVP) is a Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). MPOs are federally designated and funded regional transportation planning agency responsible for carrying out planning activities in a coordinated effort with local, State, and Tribal partners. Our Mission is to collaboratively plan, prioritize, and guide investments towards the development of a safer, more connected, and more efficient multimodal transportation system for the Mat-Su Metropolitan Planning Area.

What it reported doing in 2024

MVP' exempt purpose is the coordination of transportation planning, programs, andprojects among the governmental units in the Mat-Su persuant to 23 USC 134 (C) , (D) and (E). The main program that guides all of MVPs work is the Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP)The UPWP outlines MVPs transportation planning activities that will be undertaken over a two-year period. Consistent with the definition of UPWP at 23 C.F.R. 450.104, this UPWP includes a description of the planning work outlined by TASK, resulting products, who will perform the work, time frames for completing the work, and the source of funds.MVP is responsible for developing or adjusting the UPWP, as prescribed by 23 CFR450.308. The MPO shall:(a) Describe all the transportation activities to be completed in a fiscal year.(b) Ensure early coordination with FHWA and FTA.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 63% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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 most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 31
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 75
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 16.9%; rating input score 17
  • Program expense ratio: 66.3%; rating input score 66
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: Limited
  • 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: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 74.6%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.15; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 26.9%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

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

Details

  • Where the money goes: 16.9% of revenue deployed · 66.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $128K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $52K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 17/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.