Seward Iditarod Trail Blazers Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
943112652
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2024
Location
Seward, AK, USA
Phone
2187804793
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$58,074
Expenses
$2,982
Assets
$111,535
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Daniel Seavey (Board Member)
  • Patrick O'Leary (Board Member)
  • Kimberly Strehlow (Board 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

Historic Iditarod Trail preservation and maintenance.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 92% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 83% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

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: 38
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 88
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 8.6%; rating input score 9
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 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: 94.9%; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 37.4; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 8.6% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 41 of 41 current checks pass
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 9/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.