One Valley Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
931665274
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Palm Desert, CA, USA
Phone
2067578067
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Foundations

Reported finances

Revenue
$845,979
Expenses
$644,859
Assets
$43,338
Liabilities
$186,885

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GRANT FUHR (PRESIDENT)
  • ANDREW MASON (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • GRANT FUHR (PRESIDENT)
  • ANDREW MASON (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • LESLIE DEASON (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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The one valley foundation is committed to ensuring an inclusive community for our fans, united through a shared passion for sports. We aim to create greater opportunity and impact across the coachella valley through a variety of programs and legacy events focused on our three core pillars of community, education and access to hockey.

What it reported doing in 2024

During the fiscal year, one valley foundation advanced its mission by strategically investing in nonprofit organizations and community initiatives that align with its core pillars: community, education, and access to hockey. Through targeted grantmaking, the foundation supported programs that expanded opportunity, strengthened local nonprofits, and increased access to youth development experiences across the coachella valley.a significant portion of grant funding was directed toward organizations providing educational support and youth enrichment, including after-school programming, literacy initiatives, and college and career readiness. These investments helped ensure that underserved youth have access to the tools and resources needed to succeed academically and build long-term pathways to economic mobility.the foundation also prioritized grants that strengthen community stability and well-being, supporting organizations delivering essential services such as food security, family support, and workforce development. These partnerships amplified the capacity of trusted local nonprofits to respond to community needs and create lasting, measurable impact.in alignment with its commitment to access to hockey and youth sports, the foundation funded programs designed to introduce and expand participation in hockey and related activities. These efforts reduced financial barriers, increased inclusivity, and provided young people with opportunities to develop teamwork, discipline, and confidence through sport.collectively, these grants reflect the foundation's role as a collaborative community partnerleveraging resources, fostering innovation, and supporting organizations that deliver meaningful outcomes across the region. The foundation remains committed to ensuring that all residents, particularly youth and underserved populations, have increased access to opportunity and pathways to thrive.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 72% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 93% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 68.5%; rating input score 68
  • Program expense ratio: 89.8%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 92.2%; rating input score 92; 40th 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: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 23.8%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.07; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 4.31; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -37.8% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 24.5% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.9% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 68.5% of revenue deployed · 89.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $579K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 8 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.