Nalwoodi Denzhone Strength and Beauty Community

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
473741425
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2019, Form 990-N 2016
Location
Globe, AZ, USA
Phone
6268253733
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Addictive Disorders N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$680,722
Expenses
$589,981
Assets
$989,472
Liabilities
$4,960

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRYCE BARNES (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ERIC SHIN (PROJECT MANA): $79,665 total reported compensation
  • ANITA KUSMULYANA (TREASURER): $5,743 total reported compensation
  • BRYCE BARNES (PRESIDENT): $4,018 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The organization endeavors to provide community revitalization and life transformative services for the san carlos apache people and surrounding communities through direct holistic education, training, and business development in the areas of farming, gardening, animal husbandry, life skills, art and general youth education as alternative, sustainable pathways to the prevalent challenges that exist in areas such as drug and alcohol abuse, poverty and general health.

What it reported doing in 2024

Community members engage in hands-on learning activities in our garden, chicken coop, and business activities. Education on gardening, nutrition, and physical and mental health is the primary focus. Project based education give the youth the opportunities to create plans, schedules and budgets to provide life skills and leadership development. Additionally, the organization hosts workshops about gardening, food production, business planning, apache culture, and other educational topics for the local community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 79% for direct work, and 21% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 61
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76.2%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 87.7%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9,188.26 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 100; 100th 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: 57.1%; rating input score 57; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 13.3%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.68; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.2%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 20.6% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 25.6% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 40% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 76.2% of revenue deployed · 87.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 7 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $517K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $80K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 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.

Key Signals

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

  • Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 57/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.