Nicholas Monsen Jr Scholarship Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
920086985
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2011
Forms available
Form 990 2011
Location
Naknek, AK, USA
Phone
9072464404
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards

Reported finances

Revenue
$108,361
Expenses
$136,575
Assets
$123,223
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2011. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2011. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Provide scholarships to students in community who by academic performance and other achievmts indicate an interest in advance education.

What it reported doing in 2011

Provide scholarships to students in community who by academic performance and other achievements, indicate an iterest in advanced education. 19 scholarships granted

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 100% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 57.2%; rating input score 57; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -26%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.9; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 32.3% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -8.2% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 0 of 7 board members independent · 0 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $71K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 17 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2010 to 2011
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 7 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 57/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 11/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 41/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.