Siċaŋġu Co
Legal name: Sicangu Community Development Corporation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 833857527
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2020–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Jul 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2019
- Location
- Mission, SD, US
- Phone
- 605-856-8400
- Rating
- 71
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Business and Industry
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $3,741,024
- Expenses
- $3,280,499
- Assets
- $6,640,876
- Liabilities
- $3,002,026
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- CLAY COLOMBE (MEMBER AT LARGE - REDCO CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- MICHAEL R PRATE JR (TOP MGMT OFFICIAL - REDCO MANAGING DIRECTOR): $86,583 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To improve the financial and social well-being of our tribal relatives.
What it reported doing in 2024
Sicangu Food Sovereignty Initiative: The Sicangu Food Sovereignty Initiative strengthens community food systems through local food production distribution and agricultural capacity building. During the year the program launched the Relatives Feeding Relatives program providing food boxes containing locally produced foods including bison meat and fresh produce to more than 2,000 families and distributing 12,000 pounds of buffalo and 6,300 pounds of fresh produce during a federal government shutdown. The initiative also launched the Local Foods Capacity Program supporting seven community members in developing home-based food production projects such as greenhouses and poultry production. In addition the program distributed $558,765 worth of locally produced foods supported 40 local vendors through the Sicangu Harvest Market and began planning expansion of the Keya Wakpala community garden from one acre to 8.9 acres to increase local food production.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 86% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and some filed totals do not add up.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 56
- Transparency & Controls: 86
- Accountability: 75
- Sustainability: 53
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 59.9%; rating input score 60
- Program expense ratio: 68.3%; rating input score 68
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 7th 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: 75%; rating input score 75; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 12.3%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.02; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.45; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: Limited
Growth
- Program expense growth: 43% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 27.9% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 32.8% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 16 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 59.9% of revenue deployed · 68.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 3 of 4 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $2.2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $87K · 6 people listed
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $101K reported
- Consistency: 41 of 43 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 24/100.