Olympia Companies Southern Highlands Charitable Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
880509995
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Las Vegas, NV, USA
Phone
7022206565
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Foundations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,778,435
Expenses
$1,574,241
Assets
$618,718
Liabilities
$233,032

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GARRY V GOETT (DIRECTOR & PRESIDENT)
  • GUY INZALACO (DIRECTOR & VICE-PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • GARRY V GOETT (DIRECTOR & PRESIDENT)
  • GUY INZALACO (DIRECTOR & VICE-PRESIDENT)
  • DENE KRAMETBAUER (DIRECTOR)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To raise funds for charitable purposes.

What it reported doing in 2024

See schedule oover the past 25 years, the olympia companies southern highlands charitable foundation has been honored to support over 30 local charities throughout southern Nevada. Each year, we partner with 10 to 12 organizations, striving to spread the love across the countless groups working tirelessly in our community. While our support extends to many, our primary focus is on improving the quality of life for families in need. It's our way of giving back to the community that has given us so much, and we're committed to continuing this important work for years to come.since its first charitable event in april of 2000, the governor's black tie has called upon the most philanthropic members of the las vegas community, and to date it has raised over $30 million to support numerous, non-profit organizations that work tirelessly to serve children in need and at-risk families throughout southern Nevada.money raised over the years through ocshcf has sent critically ill children to summer camp, provided school supplies and clothing for children, created a vibrant community youth center, enabled students to access academic and financial literacy classes, financially assisted military families and families of children diagnosed with cancer to name a few.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 46
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.5%; rating input score 84
  • Program expense ratio: 95.3%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: 99.9%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 28.6%; rating input score 29; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 11.5%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.39; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.38; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -3.9% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 84.5% of revenue deployed · 95.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 7 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $581K reported
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 12 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 12 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 29/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.