Treasure Valley Canopy Network Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
863733739
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2023
Forms available
Form 990 2023, Form 990-EZ 2022
Location
Boise, ID, USA
Phone
2089941135
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Forest Conservation

Reported finances

Revenue
$214,161
Expenses
$182,192
Assets
$107,992
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ADAM MANCINI (BOARD PRESIDENT)
  • KIM SIEGENTHALER (BOARD VICE PRESIDENT)
  • LANCE DAVISSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • LANCE DAVISSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $52,734 total reported compensation
  • ADAM MANCINI (BOARD PRESIDENT): $50 total reported compensation
  • KIM SIEGENTHALER (BOARD VICE PRESIDENT): $50 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The treasure valley canopy network collaborates and informs sustainable development of the treasure valley's urban forest in southwest Idaho.

What it reported doing in 2023

City forest credits: a program that partners with cities or large landowners to develop long-term tree planting projects that will sustain healthy and thriving trees that will meet the requirements of the national city forest credits program, to receive carbon offset credits over the course of their lifespan

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 70% 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

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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 77
  • Sustainability: 51
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 57.3%; rating input score 57
  • Program expense ratio: 67.3%; rating input score 67
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.57 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 32; 32nd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 14.9%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.59; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 29.1%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 39.7% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 34.7% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 57.3% of revenue deployed · 67.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $123K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $53K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 57/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 32/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.