Bioconsult Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
030369585
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2013
Forms available
Form 990 2013
Location
Montpelier, VT, USA
Phone
8022237770
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Energy Resources Conservation and Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$26,851
Expenses
$61,227
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SCUDDER PARKER (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • BRENDA QUIROZ MADAY (EXECUTIVE DI): $15,746 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Achieve a healthier environment, strengthen local economies, and increase energy security across the united states through the development of sustainable biomass energy systems at the community scale. Biomass energy resource center provides independent and unbiased research, technical assistance for community-scale project and program design and implementation and through public education.

What it reported doing in 2013

Assessments, communication and outreach regarding the benefits and technologies and feasibility of community wood energy projects. Assessment and promotion of sustainable fuel supplies to support biomass projects. Investigation and determination of technical feasibility and affordability of producing agriculture based biofiber fuel sources.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 8
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 45.5%; rating input score 45
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 23rd 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -128%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 25.7%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -51.6% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -58.3% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 45.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $28K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $16K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 14 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2010 to 2013
  • 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.

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 — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 45/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 13/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.