South County Alliance
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 934453778
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2024–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2023
- Location
- Grizzly Flats, CA, USA
- Phone
- 5306221234
- Rating confidence
- Limited
- Sector
- Land Resources Conservation
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $24,986
- Expenses
- $5,757
- Assets
- $69,177
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- John Taylor (Past President)
- Candance Fleming (CEO)
People named in this filing
- John Taylor (Past President)
- Amanda Keck (Treasurer)
- Candance Fleming (CEO)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The South County Alliance is dedicated to cultivating and inspiring generosity to strengthen the quality of life for the rural communities of southern El Dorado County.
What it reported doing in 2025
The specific purpose of the Corporation shall include without limitation, to raise, gather, and collect monies, real estate, donations/artifacts, bequests and other assets to be used toward the support, enhancement, restoration, public awareness and enrichment of the area known as South County in the County of El Dorado County, California within the meaning set forth in 50 l(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, as amended. The South County Alliance is committed to the restoration, preservation, and public education of the diverse historical and natural resources in the area known as South County in El Dorado County, California with special emphasis on the community of Grizzly Flats.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
- 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
- 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: 82
- Sustainability: 79
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: Limited
- Program expense ratio: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 77%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 12.02; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 57.8% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 32.3% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 5 of 5 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 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.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.