Whatcom Long Term Recovery Group

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
874509224
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Everson, WA, USA
Phone
3603030610
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Disaster Preparedness and Relief Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,253,065
Expenses
$1,222,079
Assets
$351,190
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ASHLEY BUTENSCHOEN (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • CHAD HAMMOND (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • GEORGE HALSELL (DIRECTOR)
  • ASHLEY BUTENSCHOEN (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • TANYA SILVES (SECRETARY/TREASURER)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide coordination and recovery services to individuals, families, and entities adversely impacted by disaster in whatcom county, while also planning efficiently for mitigation and response to ensure that the whatcom county area is better prepared for future disasters.

What it reported doing in 2024

Our largest program service accomplishment is the direct support of survivors of the federally declared natural disaster flooding in whatcom county through disaster case management and reconstruction. Our organization has hired, trained and supported a team of disaster case managers to work directly with clients/households who were all affected by the flooding. Disaster case management (dcm) is a time-limited collaboration between a trained case manager and a disaster survivor involving the development of a disaster recovery plan and a mutual effort to meet those disaster-caused unmet needs described in the plan. Disaster case managers make referrals to our reconstruction project management team. The goal of the reconstruction process is to restore the living conditions of disaster-stricken communities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 84% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 74% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 95%; rating input score 95
  • Program expense ratio: 97.4%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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; 63rd 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: 2.5%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.29; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 20.3% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.7% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 20.9% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 95% of revenue deployed · 97.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 13/100.