Wolly Mammoth Lodge
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 300498896
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2011–2015
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2015, Form 990-N 2010
- Location
- Pittsburg, CA, USA
- Phone
- 9255955695
- Rating
- 79
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Public Foundations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $18,975
- Expenses
- $19,102
- Assets
- $8,997
- Liabilities
- $3,000
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DAMIAN SANDHOLM (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- CHAD WEHRMEISTER (DIRECTOR CHAIRMAN OF BOARD)
- DAMIAN SANDHOLM (PRESIDENT)
- LUIS MENDOZA (DIRECTOR)
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 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Promote & support community needs, mostly through an annual college scholarship for a local high school graduating senior.
What it reported doing in 2015
5th annual golf tournament for the purpose of the annual woolly mammoth scholarship fund. The net income from this event will support the 2016 scholarship
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 95% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 80% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 79
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 37
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 79.1%; rating input score 79
- Program expense ratio: 78.6%; rating input score 79
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -0.7%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.47; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.33; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 13.1% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 9.2% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 79.1% of revenue deployed · 78.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $15K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2011 to 2015
- 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 29/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 15/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.
- Review — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization could not be resolved against the register, so the check is unfinished.