Sedona Village Partnership

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
770719368
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2021, Form 990-N 2024
Location
Sedona, AZ, USA
Phone
8053910378
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Improvement, Capacity Building N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$196,737
Expenses
$73,026
Assets
$139,110
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • David H Gill (President)

People named in this filing

  • David H Gill (President)
  • Camile Cox (Treasurer)
  • David Norton (Member)

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

Mission from our bylaws: Purpose. The character of the charitable affairs to be conducted by the corporation include the following activities for the Big Park Regional community that is located in an unincorporated area of Yavapai County, AZ: (1) Selecting artwork for the four roundabouts located in the Village of Oak Creek in accordance with criteria determined by the community; (2) contracting for the fabrication and installation of said artworks; and (3) raising the necessary funding through public and private donations to accomplish these objectives.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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

SUPPORTED - 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: 52
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 78
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 35.5%; rating input score 36
  • Program expense ratio: 95.7%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 62.9%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.9; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 48.2% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 36.5% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 35.5% of revenue deployed · 95.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $70K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 10 of 13 current checks pass · 3 findings to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 36/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Series expense component sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Series revenue less expenses did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 58/100.