Our Coastal Village Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
264584304
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Yachats, OR, USA
Phone
6024326291
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Development, Construction, Management

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,039,970
Expenses
$272,880
Assets
$5,986,896
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • K LAYNE MORRILL (PRESIDENT DI)

Highest reported compensation

  • K LAYNE MORRILL (PRESIDENT DI): $145,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Providing relief to the poor, distressed, and disadvantaged on the central Oregon coast, primarily through affordable housing.

What it reported doing in 2025

Supervision of an affordability covenant applicable to seven townhouse units owned by persons earning at or under 80% of area median income. All future buyers or tenants must meet the income eligibility. Resale prices cannot exceed the price paid plus 2% per year for each full year of ownership. Operation of a 21-unit lihtc affordable workforce housing development through fisterra gardens townhomes lp, a limited partnership in which our coastal village, inc., is the general partner. The project was completed in 2019. All units are set aside for households earning not more than 60% of area median income. Since completion, all units have been rented to eligible households. The partnership reports its income and expenses and ocv's share is reported on later schedules.

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 84% 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: 41
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 61
  • Sustainability: 85
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 13%; rating input score 13
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 63.6%; rating input score 64; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 60%; rating input score 60; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 86.6%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 21.94; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 53.1%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -5.2% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 51.2% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.5% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 13% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 5 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $273K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $145K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 20 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 13/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.