Tiny Toes Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
873871801
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Reno, NV, USA
Phone
7755304782
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$188,441
Expenses
$111,457
Assets
$175,410
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Callie Bigrigg (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Callie Bigrigg (Executive Director): $19,811 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Tiny Toes is dedicated to helping families of children diagnosed with complex medical conditions. Tiny Toes provides short-term emergent financial assistance with living and or medically related travel expenses to families who reside in northern and central Nevada and northeast rural California. when their child is diagnosed or undergoing treatment for medically complex conditions.

What it reported doing in 2025

Tiny Toes provided emergent grants to individual families to assist with living or medical travel expenses when a child was diagnosed with or undergoing extensive treatment for a medically complex condition. Families select bills they need assistance with and funds are paid directly to third party payees. To receive funds families are required to have a referral placed by a healthcare professional who attests to eligibility criteria of under 18 years medically complex diagnosis reside in northern or central NV or northeastern rural CA and have extended hospitalization or treatment needs. Families select bills to have assistance with provide copies; funds are paid directly to third party

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 63% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 88% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 57
  • Transparency & Controls: 89
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 68
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 47.1%; rating input score 47
  • Program expense ratio: 79.6%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.3 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.6%; rating input score 99; 60th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 40.9%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.57; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.8%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 43.1% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 43.9% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 62.4% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 47.1% of revenue deployed · 79.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $89K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $20K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 43 of 44 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 47/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 41/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.