Orlies Shoe Drive

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
852278538
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2023–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2022
Location
Bakersfield, CA, USA
Rating
92
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Christianity
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$77,141
Expenses
$30,211
Assets
$71,461
Liabilities
$83

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ARIKA VIGIL (PRESIDENT)
  • ALEX VIGIL (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • ARIKA VIGIL (PRESIDENT)
  • ALEX VIGIL (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ELYSE RIDDLE (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Orlies shoe drives primary purpose is to hand measure hand pick and hand deliver new tennis shoes to children in kern county that are socio-economically disadvantaged.

What it reported doing in 2025

Partner with other misc outreach ministries to hand measure hand pick and hand deliver new shoes to each child in their oildale bus ministry program and shafter migrant camp outreach. Shoes delivered and children reached: 102

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filed totals do not add up and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 69
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 80.3%; rating input score 80
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 60.8%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.37; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.3%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.8% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 47.6% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 34.9% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 80.3% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $62K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 7 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 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.

Key Signals

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

  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III program expenses within total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 30/100.