Avian Research & Conservation Institute Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
593455864
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022
Location
Gainesville, FL, USA
Phone
3525145606
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Natural Resources Conservation and Protection

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$316,606
Expenses
$347,287
Assets
$77,348
Liabilities
$19,456

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Kenneth Meyer (Executive Director, Senior Research Ecologist)
  • Kenneth Meyer (President, Board member)
  • Gary Appelson (Vice President, Board Member)

Highest reported compensation

  • Kenneth Meyer (Executive Director, Senior Research Ecologist): $82,442 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To engage in wildlife research and conservation in the public interest; to manage, preserve, and restore plant and animal species; to make research results available to the public for their use and education; to implement research, analyze data, and make recommendations; and to inform effective conservation.

What it reported doing in 2022

Understanding the ecology of the White Ibis, a large wading bird associated with seasonal wetlands, helps us identify the management needs of many at-risk wetland species so that we can sustain healthy, resilient populations. In 2020, ARCI began a large-scale remote tracking study of the White Ibis in Florida supported largely by the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD). Their goal is to document the nesting and foraging behavior of this excellent indicator species on the restored floodplain of the Kissimmee River (which was converted to a large canal in the 1940s to help control water levels in favor of large-scale agriculture. Our data are demonstrating how the White Ibis is capitalizing on the increased area, food availability, and safe nesting and roosting sites within this conservation area. In addition, we are documenting the seasonal movements of this species, which cover virtually all of peninsular Florida. Our results and recommendations will support land and water managers in their efforts to restore ecologically function wetlands with more natural water-delivery schedules.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 61% 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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 60
  • Sustainability: 19
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89.9%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 82%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $27.44 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings

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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 18th 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: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -9.7%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.22; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.25; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 23.7%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.7% per year; rating input score 0; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -5.4% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.5% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 89.9% of revenue deployed · 82% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 3 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 7 filed program accomplishments · $285K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $82K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 41 of 41 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2020 to 2022
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 25/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 11/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 19/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.