Rotary International Gillette Rotary Club

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
836006017
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2022
Location
Gillette, WY, USA
Phone
3076823836
Rating
59
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$120,758
Expenses
$109,862
Assets
$158,604
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DANNA BURCHESS (PRESIDENT)
  • TOM BALO (PRESIDENT-EL)

People named in this filing

  • KATRIN WAGNER (PAST PRESIDE)
  • DANNA BURCHESS (PRESIDENT)
  • TOM BALO (PRESIDENT-EL)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

To encourage and foster the idea of service to gillette as a basis of worthy enterprise.

What it reported doing in 2024

Provided support to the following community programs: discretionary contr. 6,417 climb Wyoming 750 blessing in a backpack 750 polio plus campaign 750 council of comm svc 750 uprising 500 ccsd - needy student fund 4,250 wreaths across amer 250 hygiene project 7,070 salvation army 1,250 yes house foundation 1,000 boys & girls club 1,500 gillette reproductive health 1,250 special olympics 1,000 womens resource center 1,250 young life 3,000 garf 750 new healthcare found 3,500 shop with a cop 750 imagination library 1,000 shelter box 1,000 total 38,737

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 61% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 49
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 52.9%; rating input score 53
  • Program expense ratio: 57.9%; rating input score 58
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 34.8%; rating input score 35; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 9%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.44; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.8% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 52.9% of revenue deployed · 57.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $64K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 17 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 53/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 58/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 35/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 58/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.