Our Village Community Center
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 824646685
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2018–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2022
- Location
- Moab, UT, USA
- Phone
- 4352600294
- Rating
- 70
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Community, Neighborhood Development
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $266,745
- Expenses
- $192,904
- Assets
- $1,618,800
- Liabilities
- $397
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ANDREA WATTS (President)
Highest reported compensation
- ANDREA WATTS (President): $19,688 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
As stewards of the land, our village community center cultivates togetherness and life-long learning for all ages.
What it reported doing in 2025
Our Village Community Center fosters connection, learning, and growth across generations through health, education, and sustainable practices on our 5-acre farm in Moab, Utah. Our programs support families with young children, promote intergenerational relationships, provide youth development through outdoor education, and strengthen community food security through local farming initiatives.In 2025, we served more than 75 families through family support programs including Family Dinners, Fridays on the Farm, prenatal and postpartum support groups, parent education opportunities, and community gatherings. These programs provide essential connection, education, and support for families during the critical early childhood years. Through the generosity of a dedicated donor, we also provided approximately $3,000 per month in preschool scholarships to low-income families, ensuring access to high-quality early childhood education and promoting long-term family well-being.Our educational programs served 30 preschool children, 18 after-school participants, and 99 summer camp attendees, providing a total of 158 days of outdoor, nature-based learning experiences on our farm campus.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 74% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. 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: 60
- Transparency & Controls: 94
- Accountability: 62
- Sustainability: 72
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 51.6%; rating input score 52
- Program expense ratio: 71.3%; rating input score 71
- Fundraising efficiency: $28.96 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- 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: 27.7%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 8.39; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 10.2%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 19.5% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -41% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -0.3% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 51.6% of revenue deployed · 71.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $138K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $20K · 5 people listed
- Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2018 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 52/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 27/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.