Rancho Feliz Charitable Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
860680369
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Phoenix, AZ, USA
Phone
6025389192
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,651,927
Expenses
$2,025,474
Assets
$1,342,861
Liabilities
$252,528

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • POWELL B GILLENWATER III (PRESIDENT)
  • DONNA VALDES (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • DONNA VALDES (CEO): $130,400 total reported compensation
  • MONICA GERY (PROGRAM DIRE): $85,400 total reported compensation
  • ELLEN VERSEN (DIRECTOR ACC): $81,800 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

A volunteer-based, binational organization committed to serving the community of agua prieta, sonora, mexico through access to education through public and private scholarships, affordable housing and volunteer opportunities such as food distributions and home building, to keep communities on both sides of the border connected.

What it reported doing in 2024

Education for over 36 years, rancho feliz has been committed to breaking the cycle of poverty by offering preschool through college scholarships to low-income families. Scholarships are funded by donations and provide students with high-quality bi-lingual education at private and public local schools. Scholarships include registration, tuition, books and other academic materials, psychological assistance and student activities. Once a student graduates from high school, depending on their career choice, they have the opportunity to attend a local technical collage or a public university in mexico. Scholarships are reviewed on an annual basis and students and families are expected to comply with scholarship expectations and guidelines.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 65% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 65% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 70%; rating input score 70
  • Program expense ratio: 91.4%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: $27.91 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.9%; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 23.6%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.66; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.19; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.7%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13.8% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.5% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 70% of revenue deployed · 91.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 8 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $130K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 24/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 45/100.