Sacred Trust

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
473799205
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2018
Location
Durango, CO, US
Phone
8126300787
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Religion Related N.E.C.
Affiliation
Religious (unspecified)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$49,777
Expenses
$45,594
Assets
$1,041,248
Liabilities
$655,507

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • NELSON CARABALLO (PRESIDENT)
  • RAMONA HOFFMAN (CEO)

People named in this filing

  • NELSON CARABALLO (PRESIDENT)
  • RAMONA HOFFMAN (CEO)
  • DELLA ROMERO WOLFCHILD (SECRETARY)

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

Overview

Mission

To listen and act in harmony with those processes — to help awaken humanity’s remembrance of its sacred place within Nature, not apart from it. We do not intervene; we accompany.

What it reported doing in 2025

Recovery of ancestral lands-provide transportation, nourishment, supplies, and lodging to support field work and ceremonial processes, temples & sacred sites-collaborate with elders who guide the restoration and edification of temples at sacred sites in la sierra. Journeys & field work- strengthens the spiritual and organizational foundation of all st programs through direct engagement with elders.

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 75% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 51
  • Transparency & Controls: 78
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 60.1%; rating input score 60
  • Program expense ratio: 53.4%; rating input score 53
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Pass
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 8.4%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 22.84; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.63; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -25.6% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -5.4% per year; rating input score 0; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 31.5% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 60.1% of revenue deployed · 53.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $24K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes foreign activity
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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: Program expense ratio scored 53/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.