North Valley Property Owners Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
942862321
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Chico, CA, USA
Phone
5303451321
Rating
46
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$290,111
Expenses
$291,053
Assets
$241,375
Liabilities
$8,915

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MATT DEPA (PRESIDENT)
  • BRITTANY HIGHTOWER (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JENNIFER MORRIS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • MATT DEPA (PRESIDENT)
  • BRITTANY HIGHTOWER (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ERIN CAMPOS (SECRETARY)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

The primary mission of the organization is to provide awareness through education to community property owners in the northern California counties of butte, glenn, tehama, siskiyou, shasta, trinity, modoc, lassen, colusa, plumas, sutter and yuba. To provide support and resources to enhance, educate, and advocate for the rental industry to benefit the community.

What it reported doing in 2025

Forms for members are now available on-line. We are continuing to use technology to increase the resourses available to our members and to communicate more effectively with them. We continue to update our web site. We have increased both our membership and scholarship programs to encourage education, facilitate the cpm designation and broker and sales licenses as well as industry specific designations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 97% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 26
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 6
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 30.4%; rating input score 30
  • Program expense ratio: 29.1%; rating input score 29
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • 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: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.3%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.83; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.5% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 30.4% of revenue deployed · 29.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 8 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $85K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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: Mission deployment rate scored 30/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 29/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 34/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 30/100.