North Natomas Jibe Walk Bike Bus

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
680426325
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Sacramento, CA, USA
Phone
9164199955
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Transportation Systems

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,277,812
Expenses
$1,767,875
Assets
$4,631,059
Liabilities
$16,541

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jennifer Berdugo (President)
  • Lisa Hinz (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Mellissa Meng (Executive Dir.): $175,376 total reported compensation
  • Anya McCann (Bike Program Mgr): $146,103 total reported compensation
  • Michelle Reynolds (Comm & Bus Mgr): $144,401 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To empower the North Natomas community with sustainable transportation choices that reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and advance a thriving community.

What it reported doing in 2024

Jibe to School: Sponsored bike training to high school students as part of a vocational career pathway, serving 100 students during 5 classes. Project Ride Smart class provided for over 700 students. Promoted walking, biking, and rolling to school with games and contests including Walktober, Bike Month, and Polar Bear March. Supported programs at 11 school site, encouraging and providing support for students walking to school daily. Over 26% of total school enrollment walked at least weekly.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 83% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 88% 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 69
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69.4%; rating input score 69
  • Program expense ratio: 85.4%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 76.4%; rating input score 76; 20th 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; 63rd 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: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 22.4%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.62; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 26.4%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 69.4% of revenue deployed · 85.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $1.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $175K · 9 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $331K reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 33 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.