Tahoe Area Mountain Biking Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
911852297
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2016, Form 990-PF 2014
Location
South Lake Tahoe, CA, USA
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Recreational l Clubs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$964,576
Expenses
$929,722
Assets
$1,155,485
Liabilities
$41,328

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Andrew Bray (Executive Dir.): $104,004 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

TAMBA is dedicated to the stewardship of sustainable, multiple-use trails and to preserving access for mountain bikers through advocacy, education and promotion of responsible trail use. TAMBA is primarily a trail building organization.TAMBA is organized for the following purposes:1. To build and maintain multi-use trails in the Lake Tahoe area.2. Promote the appreciation of and care for all public lands.3. Educate concerning appropriate mountain biking access to all public lands.4. Act as an educating communication link between and among public land users and public land managers.5. Maintain access to specific public trails in the Lake Tahoe and Truckee area.6. Work with other user groups in resolving conflicts in order to work cooperatively to promote appreciation of and care for public lands.7. Work with other local, state and national biking organizations to promote the interests of mountain bikers.8. Promote a positive image of mountain bikers with officials and the general public

What it reported doing in 2024

Building and maintaining mountain bike trails and parks in Lake Tahoe and Truckee area

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 74% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 77
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75.5%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 77.1%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.71 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • 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: 3.6%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.24; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.2%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 20% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 21.2% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 24.1% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 75.5% of revenue deployed · 77.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 11 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $717K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $104K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 43/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 46/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 50/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 56/100.