Upper Kittitas County Community Recreation Center Alliance

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
863482779
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Cle Elum, WA, USA
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$258,447
Expenses
$252,164
Assets
$115,916
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Claire Hein Nicholls (President)
  • Andrew Lyons (Vice President and Secretary)

People named in this filing

  • Bill Vertrees (Director)
  • Claire Hein Nicholls (President)
  • Andrew Lyons (Vice President and Secretary)

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

Overview

Mission

To support the feasibility analysis, design, and construction of a community recreation center for upper Kittitas County in Washington state

What it reported doing in 2025

Construction documents are 99% complete as of December 31, 2025. Secured a $3.3 million lodging tax grant from Kittitas County and a $150,000 grant from the Washington State Department of Commerce. Obtained approval from municipalities and Kittitas County (along with additional funding from Kittitas County) to proceed with a Feasibility Review for forming a Public Facilities District (as required by state of Washington). Conducted monthly meetings with the Project Committee. Communicated with the community via website, emails, social media, and in-person meetings.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 95% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 97.6%; rating input score 98
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 2.4%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.46; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 29.4% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 23.1% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.3% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 97.6% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $252K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $229K reported
  • Consistency: 41 of 41 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2021 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 41/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.