Coastal Wildlife Club Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 592995507
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2017–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2013, Form 990-N 2016
- Location
- Englewood, FL, USA
- Phone
- 9414733292
- Rating
- 76
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $425,117
- Expenses
- $247,458
- Assets
- $824,842
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Zoe Bass (President)
- Wilma Katz (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- Zoe Bass (President)
- Wilma Katz (Vice President)
- Carol Leonard (SecretaryTreasurer)
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
For charitable and scientific purposes dedicated to educating others about and preserving our coastal resources including the local habitats and wildlife.
What it reported doing in 2025
Planning and implementing Coastal Wildlife Clubs Marine Turtle Monitoring Program, both in areas included in contractual services and areas done on a volunteer basis. Includes $126,110 cost of hired boat transportation to access area without bridges or ferry service. Activities include on - the - beach training, gatherings, and sponsorships, as well as partial funding of registrations and travel for both board of directors and volunteers to attend symposia, conventions etc that help to create a cadre of turtle monitors; material and supply purchases for use of volunteers; data collection, report preparation and collaboration with local and state regulatory agencies; and with local, regional and national organizations to help provide data and other information or materials regarding marine turtle nesting on our local beaches that inform and support conservation efforts.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 88% 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 77% for direct work, and 23% for grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 67
- Transparency & Controls: 78
- Accountability: 82
- Sustainability: 79
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 51.4%; rating input score 51
- Program expense ratio: 98.1%; rating input score 98
- Fundraising efficiency: $22.73 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 81.8%; rating input score 82; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 78.7%; rating input score 79; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- 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: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 41.8%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.33; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 24.2% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 12.5% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 10.4% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 51.4% of revenue deployed · 98.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $243K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 19 of 21 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2017 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 3 filed related-organization links
- 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: Mission deployment rate scored 51/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 58/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.