Methow Valley Citizens Council

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
911061350
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2015, Form 990-N 2012
Location
Twisp, WA, USA
Phone
5099970888
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$607,555
Expenses
$570,487
Assets
$411,947
Liabilities
$52,285

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JASMINE MINBASHIAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Until 1025)
  • MARY YGLESIA (INTERIM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JASMINE MINBASHIAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Until 1025): $75,178 total reported compensation
  • MARY YGLESIA (INTERIM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $50,910 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the Methow Valley Citizens Council is to raise a strong community voice for the protection of the Methow Valleys natural environment and rural character.

What it reported doing in 2025

Land Use: MVCCs early work on land use planning set the stage for the Methow Valleys low-density development and considerable open space. In 2025, MVCC continued to engage members, volunteers, and the community at-large in land use planning from Okanogan Countys regulatory framework to state and federal policies affecting our public lands, engaging in efforts to improve Okanogan Countys comprehensive plan and working to improve forestry and management on national forest lands.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 89% 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 a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 62.4%; rating input score 62
  • Program expense ratio: 66.3%; rating input score 66
  • Fundraising efficiency: $16.2 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 49; 49th 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; 78th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6.1%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.72; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 22.1%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.9% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.1% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 62.4% of revenue deployed · 66.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $378K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $75K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 49/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 48/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.