The Global Climbing Initiative Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
844133618
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2021, Form 990-N 2020
Location
Superior, CO, USA
Phone
7206552766
Rating
36
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy

Reported finances

Revenue
$144,398
Expenses
$96,169
Assets
$99,304
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Scott Pagel (President)

People named in this filing

  • Scott Pagel (President)
  • Tyler Algeo (Secretary)
  • Ludivine Brunissen (Treasurer)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

The Global Climbing Initiative equips climbing communities worldwide with the knowledge and resources to thrive.

What it reported doing in 2024

Climbing Leadership Fund-Through the Climbing Leadership Fund, we initiate projects hand-in-hand with local climbing communities to make a deep investment in the trajectory of their growth. In 2024, our two Climbing Leadership Fund projects took place in Malawi and the Philippines. In Malawi, local climbing leaders learned skills in climbing tourism development, specifically skills for scouting new crags and routes, as well as climbing videography skills. In the Philippines, 35 local climbing leaders participated in nonprofit development workshops covering topics such as mission and vision, goals and strategy, and building a strong team.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

REVIEW - Revenue comfortably covers expenses and revenue has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 35
  • Transparency & Controls: 51
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 69
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 33.4%; rating input score 33
  • Program expense ratio: 50.2%; rating input score 50
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Pass
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 33.4%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.03; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -52.5% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 39.2% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 46.2% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 33.4% of revenue deployed · 50.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 0 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $48K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 17 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes foreign activity
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 33/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 50/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 41/100.