Charles River Conservancy Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
043503656
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Cambridge, MA, USA
Phone
6176081410
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,056,299
Expenses
$1,001,696
Assets
$1,439,361
Liabilities
$111,204

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • LAURA JASINSKI (EXECUTIVE DI): $165,476 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The conservancy works to amplify community voice and catalyze bold solutions, to make the lower charles river and its parks more vibrant, healthy and welcoming now and in the future. Our works aligns with 3 "c"s: connect organizations, people and communities to each other and the river and its parks. Create bold, impactful solutions that elevate and strengthen the river and its parks as an essential ecological foundation and cultural asset for greater boston. Celebrate the river and its parks and the intersection of people and nature to inspire involvement.

What it reported doing in 2024

Charles river floating wetland - through the installation and maintenance of a human-made island of wetland plants, this project is expanding the tools available to support a resilient urban river and is increasing the community's understanding of local ecosystems. Through research that has included 3 years of water quality monitoring and a fish camera, this floating wetland is providing insights into how these installations can benefit aquatic ecosystems. Through youth programming and community outreach, including build-your-own-wetland kits and kayak tours, the project is also a platform for experiental environmental education.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 92% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 62.7%; rating input score 63
  • Program expense ratio: 65%; rating input score 65
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.99 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 5.2%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.44; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.5%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -11.7% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -8.3% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 62.7% of revenue deployed · 65% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $651K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $165K · 10 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 27/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 50/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 54/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 46/100.