Altamaha Riverkeeper Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
582448037
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2022
Location
Brunswick, GA, USA
Phone
4234433308
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management

Reported finances

Revenue
$148,849
Expenses
$201,480
Assets
$37,140
Liabilities
$6,271

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • James Reilly (President)
  • Adam Heag (Vice President)
  • Fletcher Sams (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Fletcher Sams (Executive Director): $77,920 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 Protect and restore the habitat, water quality and flow of the Altamaha River and its watershed tributaries.

What it reported doing in 2024

Advocacy, Education, and Watershed Monitoring: We work with citizens to monitor, identify and report pollution problems in our watershed and coastal estuary to responsible enforcement authorities. We work with public interest law firms to enforce federal and state law through negotiation and legal action against polluters and regulatory agencies as necessary. We educate citizens of all ages about the wildlife, beauty, and importance of our watershed.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

SUPPORTED - 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 10
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 80.7%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.64 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

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: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: -35.4%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.18; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.17; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 38.7%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.5% per year; rating input score 0; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.1% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.3% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 80.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 12 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $163K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $78K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 32/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 10/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 21/100.