Damascus Citizens for Sustainability Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
262951372
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2016
Location
Milanville, PA, USA
Phone
8452526677
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Research Institutes and/or Public Policy Analysis

Reported finances

Revenue
$77,599
Expenses
$87,792
Assets
$65,407
Liabilities
$3,472

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • BARBARA ARRINDELL (CHAIRPERSON): $22,500 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 organization is a collaborative endeavor to preserve and protect clear air, land and water as a civil and basic human right in the face of the threat posed by the shale gas extraction industry.

What it reported doing in 2024

DCS has been instrumental, since its 2008 inception, in drawing attention to drilling and infrastructure health impacts. The organization continued its public awareness campaign to educate people about the hydraulic fracturing process and related activities by providing assistance to over 40 communities in 9 states. This includes answering questions, and providing information (including detailed scientific data), so that communities have accurate information to counter the gas-oil-infrastructure industries many inaccurate claims and positions. By supplying grassroots groups with reliable information and data, it enables these groups to provide better, more effective community education. This results in the public making wiser and more informed personal and land use decisions. Continuing its focus on the public health impacts of gas and oil drilling, DCS completed the third in a series of fold-out posters showing the environmental and human health impacts of gas oil drilling with hydraulic fracturing. This poster called Upper Ohio Basin in Pennsylvania, Ohio, West Virginia Whats In The Water was printed and started distribution to groups in 2022 and continued into 2023.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 81
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 80.2%; rating input score 80
  • Program expense ratio: 70.9%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.96 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings

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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 26th 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: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -13.1%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.75; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 25.6%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -12.9% per year; rating input score 0; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -7.8% per year; rating input score 0; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 80.2% of revenue deployed · 70.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $62K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $22K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2011 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 51/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 44/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 21/100.