Conservation Agreement Fund A Nj Nonprofit Corporation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 262785233
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2023
- Location
- Lewes, DE, USA
- Phone
- 3012049833
- Rating
- 75
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Environmental Quality, Protection, and Beautification N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $62,052
- Expenses
- $87,249
- Assets
- $930,967
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Richard Rice (President)
- Aaron Bruner (Vice President)
Highest reported compensation
- Richard Rice (President): $5,000 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The mission of the Conservation Agreement Fund CAF is to ensure the long-term protection of globally significant areas by providing financial and technical support for incentive-based conservation agreements. To sustain the benefits provided by these agreements we administer a dedicated endowment established in partnership with Conservation Internationals Global Conservation Fund with generous contributions from Nia Tero AusAID and other valued supporters.
What it reported doing in 2025
Scholarship Program 18,100 -- Provided scholarships to 85 students across 12 regions helping 46 families with secondary school vocational training mechanic electrical plumbing post-secondary degrees and advanced studies. These scholarships sustained educational access in remote Solomon Islands communities building long-term human capital alongside biodiversity conservation efforts see Schedule O for details.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 62% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 82
- Transparency & Controls: 71
- Accountability: 79
- Sustainability: 42
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 77.6%; rating input score 78
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Claims monitoring procedures: Limited
- Requires narrative reports: Limited
- Conducts field audits: Limited
- May suspend future funding: Limited
- Requires financial reports: Limited
- Conducts site visits: Limited
- Requires grant agreements: Limited
- May require repayment: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st 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 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- 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: -40.6%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 10.67; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 5.7%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 200% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -2.4% per year; rating input score 0; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 6.6% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 77.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $68K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $5K · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 43 of 45 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2012 to 2025
- 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.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 28/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX CompCurrentOfficersDirectors column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.