Sierra Madre Alliance Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
860654061
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2019
Forms available
Form 990 2019
Location
Oro Valley, AZ, USA
Phone
6144105551
Rating confidence
Limited

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$0
Expenses
$0
Assets
$21,879
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOSHUA MAILMAN (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • AIDA ISELA GONZALEZ DIAZ (DIRECTOR)
  • TED ROUSE (DIRECTOR)
  • FERNANDA VENZON (DIRECTOR)

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 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Sma promotes and protects the rights of indigenous people in the sierra tarahumara, northern mexico, through legal advice and education, sma also facilitates the elaboration of social, economic and enviromental projects by indigenous people acording to their own priorities.

What it reported doing in 2019

Community development to empower indigenous people so they can develop their own sustainable development project proposals and ecological practices. This program directly benefits 1700 individuals.

Operating model

Revenue model
No positive adjusted resources. The filing reports no positive adjusted operating resources.
Distribution model
No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 40
  • Accountability: 12
  • Sustainability: 8
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 80%; rating input score 80; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • 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: Limited
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: Limited
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: Limited

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -64.6% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -118.4% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -51.8% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 10 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes foreign activity
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2016 to 2019
  • 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.

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

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Series filing activity did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.