Christina Conservancy Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
510263500
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2016
Location
Wilmington, DE, USA
Phone
3025750873
Rating
58
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$35,292
Expenses
$14,958
Assets
$290,029
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • John L Williams (President)
  • Martha C Narvaez (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • John L Williams (President)
  • Martha C Narvaez (Vice President)
  • Kimberly A Brinson (Secretary)

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

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

Overview

Mission

To promote the preservation, restoration, and appreciation of the historic and natural resources of the Christina River watershed.

What it reported doing in 2024

Promotion of preservation, restoration, and appreciation of the Christina River watershed. The Conservancy seeks to achieve this mission by providing financial support, advocacy support, communication, education, and leadership in cooperation with state and local agencies, other non-profit organizations, businesses, residents, landowners, and user groups to:* Provide appropriate and responsible access to the river and associated natural areas;* Reduce water pollution to the Christina and its tributaries;* Protect and enhance important natural and heritage areas of the watershed; and* Engage people in stewardship of the watershed.An annual Christina River Watershed Cleanup is conducted which has removed nearly 400 tons of tires, appliances, and other trash from the watershed.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 63% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 36
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 80
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 43%; rating input score 43
  • Program expense ratio: 36.9%; rating input score 37
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 18th 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: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 57.6%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 19.39; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -16.5% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -25.5% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.5% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 43% of revenue deployed · 36.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $6K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 15 of 15 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 43/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 37/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.