Center for Human-environmental Research

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
814037370
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2021–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2020, Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
New Orleans, LA, USA
Phone
5044272694
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Research Institutes and/or Public Policy Analysis

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$0
Expenses
$66,896
Assets
$124,679
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Grant McCall (Executive Director)
  • Andrew jacoby (President, Board of Directors)

People named in this filing

  • Grant McCall (Executive Director)
  • Andrew jacoby (President, Board of Directors)
  • Nicholas Lindner (Secretary, Board of Directors)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Center for Human-Environmental Research is dedicated to research and educational outreach on topics having to do with human adaptations to changing social, economic, and environmental conditions.

What it reported doing in 2025

We conducted ethnographic research among coastal communities in Plaquemines Parish, LA. This research focused on community resilience and adaptations to coastal erosion, especially in relation to small-scale commercial fishers. These activities were conducted by Sherman Horn and Grant McCall.

Operating model

Revenue model
No positive adjusted resources. The filing reports no positive adjusted operating resources.
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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 52
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 27
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: 52.2%; rating input score 52

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: Limited
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.86; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 39.5%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 19.3% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -6.9% per year; rating input score 0; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 52.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $35K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2021 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.