Robert N Carson 1

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
236205871
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Phone
4128076049
Rating
51
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$641,022
Expenses
$821,511
Assets
$8,021,357
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • PNC BANK N A (CO-TRUSTEE): $46,102 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Financial support of the carson valley school

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 92% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue has grown recently. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 39
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 12
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 62%; rating input score 62
  • Program expense ratio: 13.6%; rating input score 14
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: Limited
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -28.2%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 9.76; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.6%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -8.8% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 62% of revenue deployed · 13.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 1 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $112K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $46K · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 16 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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: Program expense ratio scored 14/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 49/100.