Defensores De La Cuenca

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
851090314
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2020
Location
Cheverly, MD, USA
Phone
2404158821
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Environmental Education and Outdoor Survival Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,332,831
Expenses
$1,042,736
Assets
$635,593
Liabilities
$171,241

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ABEL OLIVO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • ERIC GUERRERO (PRESIDENT)
  • JUAN LAZO BAUTISTA (VICE-PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ABEL OLIVO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $125,585 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Our name means watershed defenders. A non-profit dedicated to helping the latino community connect with the natural world through knowledge, shared experiences, and opportunities to preserve and defend the chesapeake bay watershed for a healthier mind, body and soul.

What it reported doing in 2024

Other programs: over the past year we have been able to engage thousands of community members, both in-person and online, across the chesapeake bay watershed with the goal of building a network of leaders who are taking action to support the environment. We create family friendly events that are welcoming and inviting to ensure positive connections to nature. We share information about the many benefits of a clean and healthy environment and how we can positively impact it. We invite students to earn their service hours to help make positive change and support their communities. Hundreds of volunteers, thousands of pounds of trash collected, hundreds of trees planted.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 67% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 78% for direct work, and 22% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. 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: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 61
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 59.1%; rating input score 59
  • Program expense ratio: 75.5%; rating input score 76
  • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: 21.8%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.61; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.27; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 58.2% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 47.4% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 33.3% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 59.1% of revenue deployed · 75.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $788K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $126K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 59/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 28/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 30/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.