Association of Nature Center Administrators

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
311416058
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Logan, UT, USA
Phone
4357878209
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$416,773
Expenses
$404,192
Assets
$621,470
Liabilities
$128,616

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KRISTIN SMITH (President)
  • CHAD TRUXALL (Vice President)
  • DENNIS PILASKE (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • JEN LEVY (Executive Dir.): $79,435 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The association of nature center administrators promotes and supports best leadership and management practices for the nature and environmental learning center profession. We offer many additional programs and resources including collaboration on current research relevant to nature and environmental learning centers, online discussion forums, a professional mentor program, a job posting board, and access to sample documents, e.g.: marketing plans, personnel policies, development plans, position descriptions, etc. We work with the anca network to enhance professionalism and provide the support system critical to innovative and progressive nature center management. We believe that when nature center leaders thrive, their centers can have the most impact possible on environmental education and conservation.

What it reported doing in 2024

Annual summit conference: for twenty-eight years anca's annual summit has been bringing 150-200 nature and environmental learning center leaders together in a small, intimate, face-to-face setting for information sharing, mentoring, training, and professional networking. Anca prides itself on offering a facilitated discussion format during the summit, recognizing the tremendous value gained by sharing peer knowledge and experiencees of others in the field.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 80.4%; rating input score 80
  • Program expense ratio: 78.7%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.5 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 16; 16th 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.54; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 19.7%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.8% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 80.4% of revenue deployed · 78.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $318K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $79K · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 16/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 46/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 19/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.