Roadtrip Nation Ltd

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
263889207
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2021
Forms available
Form 990 2021, Form 990-T 2021
Location
Indianapolis, IN, USA
Phone
9497649121
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Student Services, Organizations of Students

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,778,608
Expenses
$12,785,079
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • THOMAS C DAWSON (DIRECTOR AND PRESIDENT)
  • BRIAN MCALLISTER (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MICHAEL MARRINER (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • LARRY A LUTZ (DIRECTOR, CHAIRMAN, AND PRESIDENT)
  • NATHAN GEBHARD (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • WILLIAM D HANSEN (DIRECTOR THRU 2/2021): $2,083,180 total reported compensation
  • THOMAS C DAWSON (DIRECTOR AND PRESIDENT): $622,417 total reported compensation
  • ALLEN S FLEMING (DIRECTOR THRU 1/2021): $582,602 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To inspire and empower students to find their life path through educational curricula and hands on experiences associated with said curricula. The funds were spent on development of curricula (such as roadtrip nation experience) including education workbooks and online content, licensing fees for the roadtrip nation, ltd experience content, education website development and outreach to college campuses and career centers.

What it reported doing in 2021

To inspire and empower students to find their life path through educational curricula and hands on experiences associated with said curricula. The funding furthers the development of curricula including the roadtrip nation experience, educational workbooks, other online content, and outreach to college campuses and career centers.

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 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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 42
  • Sustainability: 1
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 76.1%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.72 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -121.2%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16.7% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.6% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 22.9% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 76.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 5 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $9.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $2.1M · 16 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $865K reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2011 to 2021
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 9 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.

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

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 5/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.