Snowflake Community Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
461899825
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015
Location
St Johns, AZ, USA
Phone
6237728111
Rating
51
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Foundations

Reported finances

Revenue
$519,634
Expenses
$82,138
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

People named in this filing

  • J ALBERT BROWN (DIRECTOR)
  • ASHLEY POSTON (DIRECTOR)
  • MARGARET M BROPHY (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 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Snowflake community foundation is organized for the improvement of business conditions in or near the town or snowflake, az by improving and promoting the apache railway and other enterprises affiliated with the railroad

What it reported doing in 2015

Services and expenses paid to third party lawyers, accountants, financial analysts and consultants pertaining to obtaining long term sustainable financing or restructing the existing purchase bridge loan associated with the apache railroad, the preservation of which the snowflake community foundation was formed to effect. On november 25, 2015, the stock of the apache railway company was sold to the apache railroad company, llc which will continue to operate the railroad. This was the purpose of this foundation. Upon the sale of the stock and payment of all the foundation liabilities, the foundation has accomplished its objective and has terminated.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 100% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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

MIXED - 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: 29
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 57
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 3.2%; rating input score 3
  • Program expense ratio: 83.5%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 84.2%; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

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

Details

  • Where the money goes: 3.2% of revenue deployed · 83.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $69K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 11 of 12 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 3/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.