Tahoe Fund
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 010974628
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2015–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2010
- Location
- Tahoe City, CA, USA
- Phone
- 7752980035
- Rating
- 79
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $5,556,780
- Expenses
- $3,078,333
- Assets
- $14,900,652
- Liabilities
- $139,938
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
28 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- AMY BERRY (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- AMY BERRY (CEO): $266,797 total reported compensation
- Caitlin Meyer (Chief Prog Officer): $157,707 total reported compensation
- Karolina Hedman (Chief Oper Officer): $139,230 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To use the power of philanthropy to improve the Lake Tahoe environment for all to enjoy.
What it reported doing in 2024
Outreach: the tahoe fund, on its own and in collaboration with other organizations, raises awareness of the environmental needs of lake tahoe and the basin. The tahoe fund actively participates in the lake tahoe partnership, a collaboration of public and private groups in the basin that are all focused on protecting the environment through environmental improvement projects. In addition, the tahoe fund is a member of the California tahoe alliance that is dedicated to lobbying for funding for the environmental improvement program. Through these efforts the tahoe fund met with elected officials in California, Nevada and federally to educate on the need for more public support of environmental projects. The tahoe fund sponsored and organized the 2024 lake tahoe summit, a discussion of the importance of protecting and restoring lake tahoe. The summit was attended by the senators and congressmen of California and Nevada, the Nevada governor and the us secretary of transportation. It was also livestreamed to an audience of more than 1000 online. The tahoe fund also helps promote lake tahoe license plates. The plates program supports hiking and biking trails and watershed restoration through tahoe's public environmental agencies, the California tahoe conservancy and the Nevada division of state lands.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 91% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 42% for direct work, and 58% for grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 61
- Transparency & Controls: 84
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 79
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 50.8%; rating input score 51
- Program expense ratio: 78.9%; rating input score 79
- Fundraising efficiency: $17.43 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 98.1%; rating input score 98; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- 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: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 44.6%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.84; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 21.8%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 17.5% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 15.6% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 17.7% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 50.8% of revenue deployed · 78.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 23 of 23 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $2.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $267K · 28 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $126K reported
- Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 35 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 30 filed related-organization links
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 51/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 55/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.