Sierra Service Project
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 680222320
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2019–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Sacramento, CA, USA
- Phone
- 9164886441
- Rating
- 75
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Youth Centers, Clubs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,165,300
- Expenses
- $1,153,117
- Assets
- $462,005
- Liabilities
- $175,103
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
20 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Megan Taylor (Executive Director)
Highest reported compensation
- Megan Taylor (Executive Director): $96,312 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Building faith and strengthening communities through service to others.
What it reported doing in 2024
Sacramento County Year-Round Programs: SSP hosted 197 year-round volunteers in Sacramento County during Days of Service and Alternative Break sessions. Alternative Break sessions are scheduled by group request, and vary from year to year significantly in length and location - all were day only programs this year (not overnight). In Rancho Cordova, five local youth spent their spring break working on home repairs and received a small stipend to honor their time and commitment. The Sacramento Youth Center partnered with us for the fourth year to host their spring break program, where they worked at the International Garden of Many Colors. Day of Service volunteers completed a two-year project building 1,000' of wood fences and installing 10 paver art medallions for the Dixieanne Clean and Green Alley Project, funded by CalTrans through the City of Sacramento. They also worked throughout the year at community gardens with partners from WeForce Inc.'s Safe Harbor community garden and Color the Block's Rainbow Mini Park Garden. In Rancho Cordova, 50 unique volunteers (24 youth, 21 young adults, and 5 adults) completed 12 home repair projects at 6 homes for 9 residents (4 over the age of 65, and 6 who live with disabilities). In total, 59 people were impacted by SSP's reciprocal home repair program: young people got to practice new skills and build their confidence, while older adults benefited from home repair projects. An AmeriCorps NCCC team of 10 young adults from across the country kicked off our program year as we started projects after the new year. We also worked with Lutheran Social Services of Northern California and its young adult participants for extra hands at times through their workforce development program. Twelve youth from Rancho Cordova volunteered with SSP this year. Stipends were provided via Visa Gift Cards to Rancho Cordova resident youth to honor their time and commitment. Over half of the youth participated in multiple Days of Service, including two who volunteered for 12 days each, and one who volunteered for 16 days! In Rancho Cordova, 12 project units were completed, including an exterior paint project, ramp repair, deck repair, six stair repairs, and a wheelchair lift installation. Youth also spent four days with SSP volunteering at the Rancho Cordova Food Locker.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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 a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 61
- Transparency & Controls: 86
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 31
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 66.8%; rating input score 67
- Program expense ratio: 66.9%; rating input score 67
- Fundraising efficiency: $4.72 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 19th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 1%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.4; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.38; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 8.4%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 13.8% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 14.3% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -3.6% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 66.8% of revenue deployed · 66.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 19 of 19 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $771K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $96K · 20 people listed
- Consistency: 44 of 45 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 16/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 39/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 42/100.