Sleepy Hollow Charitable Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
461460882
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
San Anselmo, CA, USA
Phone
4157206472
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$373,915
Expenses
$276,562
Assets
$3,256,578
Liabilities
$1,468,835

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Kai Broms (President)

People named in this filing

  • Kai Broms (President)
  • Luke Argilla (Secretary)
  • Virginia Blackford (Treasurer)

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

The specific purposes of the Sleepy Hollow Charitable Foundation are (1) Provide disaster planning, response and recovery services;(2) educate the public about safety, environmental and other issues;(3) provide programming and space for older adults;(4) provide child care in accordance with Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (The "Code");(5) Operated fitness facility in accordance with Section 501(c)(3) of The Code; and (6) engage in any other charitable activities.

What it reported doing in 2025

1.) Sleepy Hollow charitable foundation revenue $270,830, expenses $ 275,885 Less MGMT expenses of $78,762 Fundraising expenses of $10,457 and less depr/amort expenses of $ 71,354 total $119,850.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 72% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 32
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 72
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 32.1%; rating input score 32
  • Program expense ratio: 43.3%; rating input score 43
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 26th 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 26%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 11.78; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.45; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 19.6% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.5% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 32.1% of revenue deployed · 43.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $120K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 32/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 43/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 9/100.