Route91strong

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
823098961
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2019
Forms available
Form 990 2019, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Rocklin, CA, USA
Phone
8335887917
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$29,608
Expenses
$179,419
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LISA FINE (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • LISA FINE (PRESIDENT): $35,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Standing strong with survivors of mass gun violence to raise awareness, funds and to gather resources for all victims, survivors and families. Route91strong is a non-partisan, non-political, support group created by survivors to help other survivors of mass gun violence tragedies come together for "financial support, hope, strength, change, and love."

What it reported doing in 2019

Route91strong is a non-partisan, non-political, 501c3 nonprofit benefit corporation that is the conduit between the survivors of mass gun violence and the donors who care. The organization has been able to raise funds from the generous donations of individuals and organizations that deeply care about and are determined to offer financial assistance to meet the immediate needs and financial hardships of mass gun violence survivors. Co-founders brian claypool and lisa fine survived the route 91 harvest country music festival shooting in vegas that occurred on sunday, october 1, 2017. Alongside their team of fellow survivors and trusted experts, they are committed to raising needed funds for the assistance and aid of those whose lives have been impacted by mass gun violence happening in america's schools, places of worship, airports, concerts, nightclubs, movie theaters and the workplace. These victims and survivors desperately need time to get their lives back on track after suffering through such horrors. Many of our applicants suffer from severe ptsd, are losing jobs, homes & sadly many are on suicide watch. Gun violence has lasting effects on those who experience this kind of trauma, such as physical & emotional injuries, a long challenging recovery process, trouble assimilating, and difficulty maintaining a 'normal' home and work life. Our team is dedicated to helping survivors of mass gun violence come together for "financial support, hope, strength, change, and love." route91strong has given out over 230,000 in funding to over 100+ families.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 77% 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 62
  • Sustainability: 6
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 66.1%; rating input score 66
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0.89 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.7%; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -506%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 19.5%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -47% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -170.4% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -200% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 66.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 10 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $119K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $35K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2018 to 2019
  • 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.

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

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 15/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.