Rotary Foundation of Camas Washougal

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
911938064
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2017–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2023
Location
Camas, WA, USA
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards

Reported finances

Revenue
$64,894
Expenses
$53,753
Assets
$244,121

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Kathryn Bussman (Foundation President)

People named in this filing

  • Kathryn Bussman (Foundation President)
  • George Cappaci (Secretary)
  • Maxwell Hall (Treasurer)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Award Scholarships & grants to non-profits in Camas and Washougal WA. Support member initiated projects with donor-directed donations both internationally and in Camas and Washougal WA.

What it reported doing in 2025

Local non-profit grants: in collaboration with Camas-Washougal Community Chest awarded 12,720 awarded grants to AKIN 2,000 serving families with baby supplies counseling support; ReFuel Washougal 5,000 serving meals to homeless and food-insecure people; Unite! Washougal Community Coalition 5,000 helping underprivileged students and their families; CW Historical Society 760 for the local 2Rivers Museum. 400 people served.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 89% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filed totals do not add up and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 74.9%; rating input score 75
  • Program expense ratio: 90.4%; rating input score 90

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 17.2%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.54; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.7% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 74.9% of revenue deployed · 90.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $49K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 8 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2017 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.