Nhra Vision
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 943021388
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- San Dimas, CA, USA
- Phone
- 6269144761
- Rating
- 64
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,097,813
- Expenses
- $833,442
- Assets
- $2,937,286
- Liabilities
- $512,440
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DALE COLEMAN (PRESIDENT & CHAIR)
Highest reported compensation
- BRADLEY GERBER (BOARD MEMBER): $553,670 total reported compensation
- EVAN JONAT (BOARD MEMBER): $376,370 total reported compensation
- MARLEEN GURROLA (BOARD MEMBER): $328,396 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Nhra vision is organized for charitable and educational purposes. The organization obtains, cares for and displays items of lasting interest or value relating to the sport of drag racing in a facility that is open to the general public. The organization sponsors and carries on activities that foster a better understanding of the history and development of the sport and the people and industry associated with the sport, and promotes the sport of drag racing, including promoting participation in the sport by youth and others.
What it reported doing in 2024
Since their inception, the nostalgia racing events formerly known as "hot rod reunions and now known as "nostalgia nationals" have offered hot rodders and racers the opportunity to reunite with old friends and reminisce about "the good old days" while also providing a platform for new people to experience the historic origins of the sport. The nostalgia nationals include vintage drag racing, a car show, a chance for fans to meet the legends and stars of the sport, and the highly popular "cacklefest" automobile exhibition.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- 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 - 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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 79
- Transparency & Controls: 71
- Accountability: 41
- Sustainability: 66
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 85.5%; rating input score 86
- Program expense ratio: 93.2%; rating input score 93
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 14.3%; rating input score 14; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 24.1%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.52; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.17; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 27.5%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -5.6% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -6% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -2.2% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 85.5% of revenue deployed · 93.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 1 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $777K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $554K · 7 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- Related organizations: 2 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.
- High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 14/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 34/100.