Carbon Cycle Institute

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
462694752
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2023
Forms available
Form 990 2023
Location
Petaluma, CA, USA
Phone
7079925009
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Science and Technology N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,062,785
Expenses
$1,289,112
Assets
$892,410
Liabilities
$394,241

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Torri Estrada (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Torri Estrada (Executive Director): $112,757 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Carbon Cycle Institute's mission is to stop and reverse global warming by advancing natural, science-based solutions that remove atmospheric carbon while promoting environmental stewardship, social equity and economic sustainability.

What it reported doing in 2023

The Carbon Cycle Institute has been developing a model framework for land management that emphasizes the carbon cycle as its organizing principle. Land management within this framework leads to enhanced rates of carbon capture from the atmosphere, increases the provision of important ecosystem services (especially water), and mitigates climate change. The framework relies on sound policies, public-private partnerships, quantification methodologies (COMET-Planner and COMET-Farm), and innovative financing mechanisms that ultimately empower local organizations to efficiently implement on-the-ground time tested, science-verified solutions. In addition to our advancement of effective carbon cycle solutions, CCI works continuously to deliver training and educational programs that foster carbon literacy among farmers and ranchers, technical service providers, conservation agencies and organizations, and policy makers; and proactively supports community and national policies that promote carbon stewardship.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 73% 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

STRONG - 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: 91
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 21
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 87.7%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: $15.73 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 52; 52nd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • 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: -21.3%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.69; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.44; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.7%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.7% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.9% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 87.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $113K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 41 of 41 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2013 to 2023
  • 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.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 52/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 41/100.