The Eco Village Project of Fresno
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 274820946
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2021–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2020, Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-T 2024, Form 990-N 2016
- Location
- Fresno, CA, USA
- Phone
- 5593412254
- Rating
- 69
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Homeless Shelters
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $49,607
- Expenses
- $54,227
- Assets
- $343,698
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
11 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Arthur Dyson (President)
- Gerald Bill (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- Arthur Dyson (President)
- Dixie Salazar (Member)
- Gerald Bill (Vice President)
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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
This corporation is a nonprofit public benefit corporation and is not organized for the private gain of any person. It is organized under the Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation Law for charitable purposes. The specific purpose of this corporation is to provide safe, sanitary, uplifting and dignified housing for the homeless in an environmentally sustainable manner. This corporation is organized and operated exclusively for charitable purposes within the meaning of 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.
What it reported doing in 2024
Provided assistance to residents as they sought permanent housing. Our rehousing assistance program includes help with first and last month's rent, deposits, moving expenses, transportation, and furnishings. 22 residents moved on in 2024, several of whom were only able to do so with our help.
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
- 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 - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 51
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 47
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 52.7%; rating input score 53
- Program expense ratio: 48.2%; rating input score 48
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -9.3%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.34; rating input score 87; 87th 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: -25.2% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -38.2% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 52.7% of revenue deployed · 48.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $26K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
- Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2021 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 53/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 48/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 31/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.