Southern California Mountains Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
330556414
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
San Bernardino, CA, USA
Phone
9098900400
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Pollution Abatement and Control Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,289,122
Expenses
$8,279,604
Assets
$6,923,727
Liabilities
$2,927,189

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHAEL JASBERG (President)
  • JAKE HUXMAN (Vice President)
  • RUSTY LAYTON (Vice President)
  • STEVE BAKER (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • STACY GORIN (Executive Dir.): $232,583 total reported compensation
  • KARL HIERL (CONTROLLER): $113,118 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

See schedule 0

What it reported doing in 2024

Urban conservation corps-a workforce development program that offers youngmen and women, ages 18-25 and youth ages 13-17, the chance to serve on oursouthern California mountains and become employable citizens through hardwork in enviromental conservation. Accomplishments included, maintained andrestored 500 acres of public land, revyved 10 tons of plastic bottles andcans, 100,00 pounds of e-waste and 30 tons of waste tires from public land, maintained seven historic fire lookout towers, planted 500 native plants, coordinated 70,000 volunteer service hours, graduated 13 urban conservationcorpsmembers through john muir charter school and coordinated over 20,000americorps service hours to mitigate wildfires in the san bernardinonational forest.

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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.5%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 82%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $70.76 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.1%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.84; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.42; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.2%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.1% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.3% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.5% of revenue deployed · 82% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $6.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $233K · 18 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 34/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 25/100.