Upper Deschutes River Coalition

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
030557393
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Sunriver, OR, USA
Phone
5418151362
Rating
47
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management

Reported finances

Revenue
$19,250
Expenses
$52,384
Assets
$36,307
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Dean Richardson (Vice President)
  • Jim Larsen (President)

People named in this filing

  • Dean Richardson (Vice President)
  • Jim Larsen (President)
  • Helen Marston (Board Member)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The UDRC's goal is to help create a healthy ecosystem within the neighborhoods bordering the Upper Deschutes River with South Deschutes County, Oregon. The organization has concentrated over the last few years in encouraging property owners to create wildfire Defensible Space by reducing wildfire fuels on their properties. The UDRC cooperates with the USFS, BLM and Oregon State Forestry to improve the fire resistance of the forests surrounding our neighborhoods.

What it reported doing in 2025

Low Income Senior (or Disabled) Assistance Program: $17,125 was paid to licensed contractors to provide 18 low income seniors with wildfire defensible space around their homes. Funds for this project came from a 2024 grant from Deschutes County ( May 1,2024 - Oct 1, 2025) $7,000 from Deschutes County; $7,900 left from older MCM grant and $2,225 from a 1 year grant from the Roundhouse Foundation awarded October of 2025. $313 in overhead expenses were spent from the 3 grants.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - 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: 8
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 11.4%; rating input score 11
  • Program expense ratio: 4.2%; rating input score 4

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -172.1%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.69; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -7.9% per year; rating input score 0; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 21.7% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -22.7% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 11.4% of revenue deployed · 4.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 11/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 4/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.