Oregon Trio Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
272616442
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2020
Location
Astoria, OR, USA
Phone
9719889506
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,028,090
Expenses
$830,605
Assets
$657,767
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MATTHEW BISEK (Executive Director)
  • CHRISTINE RIEHL (PAST-PRESIDENT)
  • NAOMI MCCREARY (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MATTHEW BISEK (Executive Director): $128,526 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Oregon TRIO Association (OTA) was founded in 2000 to increase the number of low-income, first-generation, underrepresented, and disabled student populations in higher education. OTA advocates for its TRIO programs and students at the Congressional level provides professional development opportunities for members and students in Oregon, connects community resources to students, and offers grant writing support to ensure the sustainability of its programs by the US Department of Education.

What it reported doing in 2025

Student Enrichment Services. The Oregon TRIO Association provides opportunities and resources for TRIO students throughout Oregon in an effort to aid in their pursuit of completing post-secondary education. Examples include workshops, conferences, travel abroad support, technology support, and events to support alumni.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 89% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 53
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 57
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 54.7%; rating input score 55
  • Program expense ratio: 66.7%; rating input score 67
  • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 19.2%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.79; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.5%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16.4% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.9% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -6.4% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 54.7% of revenue deployed · 66.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $554K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $129K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 41 of 41 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2021 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 55/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.