People for Indigenous Preservation and the Environment

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
680616880
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2014–2020
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2020
Location
Encino, CA, USA
Phone
8187884789
Rating
89
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Centers to Support the Independence of Specific Populations

Reported finances

Revenue
$35,498
Expenses
$35,286
Assets
$256,645
Liabilities
$15,534

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MATTHEW JACOVIDES (PRESIDENT)
  • DAVID A JACOVIDES (VICE-PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • MATTHEW JACOVIDES (PRESIDENT)
  • DAVID A JACOVIDES (VICE-PRESIDENT)

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 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The organization's three primary purposes are: 1) cultural arts preservation and educating all persons interested in native arts, customs, practices and traditions, development and implementation of educational programs; 2) the protection, preservation and restoration of our natural habitat; and 3) the preservation of existing open-spaces and vistas.

What it reported doing in 2020

Traveled to schools and communities across the united states lecturing, educating, performing ceremonies and displaying native american artifacts.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and assets have declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 99
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 99.4%; rating input score 99
  • 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: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.6%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.27; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 18.7% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.7% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 99.4% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $35K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2014 to 2020
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 47/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is not authorized to operate as a charity in California.