California Invasive Plant Council

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
680289333
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Berkeley, CA, USA
Phone
5108433902
Rating
89
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,206,413
Expenses
$5,272,785
Assets
$2,964,202
Liabilities
$2,062,933

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANDREW KERR (VICE-PRESIDENT)
  • DOUG JOHNSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/COO)

Highest reported compensation

  • DOUG JOHNSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/COO): $146,613 total reported compensation
  • JUTTA BURGER (SCIENCE PROGRAM DIRECTOR): $139,245 total reported compensation
  • AGUSTIN LUNA (DIRECTOR OF FINANCE): $117,331 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Cal-ipc protects California's environment and economy from invasive plants. We run science-based programs to train land managers, coordinate regional land management projects, and advocate for sound land management policy.

What it reported doing in 2024

Conservation science: cal-ipc supports the state's land managers in effective stewardship. We maintain tools, such as the inventory of invasive plants in California, calweedmapper, and weedcut that provide important information on the risks and spatial distribution of invasive plant species. We research the impacts of invasive plants to rare native plants to help land managers set priorities. We lead an effort with colleagues in Arizona, Oregon, Nevada, and Washington to proactively evaluate the risk of plants becoming invasive in the future. Where we can add value, we step in to provide coordination for regional implementation projects, such as the invasive spartina project in san francisco bay.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 92% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 93
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 92
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.3%; rating input score 94
  • Program expense ratio: 93.1%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: $106.45 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 87; 87th 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: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.3%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.56; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.7; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.2%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 29.2% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 27.6% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 26.2% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 94.3% of revenue deployed · 93.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 17 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $4.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $147K · 20 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $3.1M reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

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.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 13/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.