Clear Lake Environmental Research Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
471489147
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2019
Location
Lakeport, CA, USA
Phone
7078500650
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Environmental Education and Outdoor Survival Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,449,544
Expenses
$3,520,979
Assets
$1,443,665
Liabilities
$698,808

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • David Adam (Vice President)
  • Tom Nixon (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Will Evans (Director): $139,627 total reported compensation
  • David Adam (Vice President): $5,184 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 Clear Lake Environmental Research Center serves as a steward for environmental and economic sustainability of Clear Lake, its neighboring lands and waters, local communities, and beyond.

What it reported doing in 2024

In 2024, CLERC completed hundreds of acres of wildfire fuel reduction, removal of dozens of hazard trees, and supported chipping services, which benefited thousands of citizens living in the wildland-urban interface (WUI) in Lake County, California.CLERC participated in regional partnerships with conservation groups in neighboring counties to secure funding to implement forest health and wildfire resilience landowner assistance programs including the North Bay Forest Improvement Program (NBFIP). CLERC secured funds through CalFire's Wildfire Resilience Grant Program to support the North Bay Forest Improvement Program (NBFIP).CLERC worked with partners to enhance multiple wildfire resilience research projects including a dynamic fire pathways analysis and a mitigation modeling project.CLERC continued to work with local stakeholders to address the large-scale tree mortality event that started in 2021 and continued through 2022, 2023, and 2024 due to ongoing drought conditions. This event extended in 2024 with the introduction of the Mediterranean Oak Borer (MOB), an invasive species that attacks trees. CLERC worked with partners to raise awareness and begin formulation of a response plan.In support of these activities, CLERC employed several staff members dedicated to this program. CLERC worked with partners across all sectors including federal, state, and local government agencies, as well as private citizens and nonprofit organizations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 86% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

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: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 73
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 88.1%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 71.4%; rating input score 71; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2.1%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.41; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.48; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.1%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 51.8% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 51.2% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 35.7% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 90% of revenue deployed · 88.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 7 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $3.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $140K · 7 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $1.9M reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 26/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.