Coast Range Watershed Institute

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
822939829
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Healdsburg, CA, USA
Phone
7079538681
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$435,385
Expenses
$405,377
Assets
$108,717
Liabilities
$131,902

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

Leadership & pay

1 person listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MATT O'CONNOR (CEO)

People named in this filing

  • MATT O'CONNOR (CEO)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Advance the understanding, management and restoration of hydrologic, geomorphic and ecological resources by conducting scientific studies, facilitating data and information sharing, and providing education and outreach.

What it reported doing in 2025

Implementation of a multi-year project to model river hydrologic and hydraulic conditions to develop information to design and permit streamflow enhancement projects in atascadero and green valley creek watersheds near graton, sonoma county. Implementation of a multi-year project to update and improve a model for watershed hydrologic and hydraulic conditions to develop measures of effectiveness of existing and potential future streamflow enhancement projects and estimate future effects of climate change on watershed hydrologic conditions in the dutch bill creek and green valley creek watersheds, sonoma county.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 60% for direct work, and 40% for affiliated organizations.

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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91.8%; rating input score 92
  • Program expense ratio: 98.6%; rating input score 99
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6.9%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.27; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.21; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13.5% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.1% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 91.8% of revenue deployed · 98.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $400K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 1 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2018 to 2025
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 15/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 51/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 3/100.