Treasure Valley Community College Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237052989
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Ontario, OR, USA
Phone
5418815595
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Foundations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,678,536
Expenses
$1,233,443
Assets
$15,564,057
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

24 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CATHY YASUDA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • CATHY YASUDA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $73,613 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 improve the quality of life for tvcc students by creating scholarships and enhancing the environment for student life and activities.

What it reported doing in 2024

The foundation is the supporting arm of the institution. For over 50 years the foundation has been working hand-in-hand with the college and the community to provide funds that will make a difference in the lives of students through scholarships, emergency assistance and other unment needs. By generating and managing private resources, the foundation not only creates access to education, but helps make the experience the best it can be by supporting instruction, student services, and capital improvements to the institution.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 76% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 64
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 83
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86.4%; rating input score 86
  • Program expense ratio: 87.3%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.48 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.2%; rating input score 88; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 87.7%; rating input score 88; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 26.5%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 12.62; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.7% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.7% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 86.4% of revenue deployed · 87.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 20 of 22 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $74K · 24 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 27 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 39/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 50/100.