Doan Brook Watershed Partnership

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
043636350
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Cleveland, OH, USA
Phone
2163257781
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$719,452
Expenses
$584,841
Assets
$583,004
Liabilities
$404

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • NANCY MOORE (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MAUREEN DRINKARD (FORMER EXEC): $76,351 total reported compensation
  • EMILY KAO (INCOM EXEC D): $50,486 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 doan brook watershed partnership (dbwp) is to lead conservation and restoration projects that champion environmental justice and foster a sustainable and resilient watershed and to serve as a collective voice for the doan brook and its constituencies through equitable engagement and by providing reliable, accessible watershed science. Dbwp maintains a small staff including executive director emily kao and watershed program manager, alex kirchner, and a watershed program coordinator. We also rely on interns and dbwp volunteers to serve many organization and event support functions. They help to plan and carry out program events, support in-office function, restore habitats, lead hikes, collect trash and lead digital education campaigns about stormwater, sustainability and ecological health.

What it reported doing in 2025

Planning: dbwp hosted a committee of city, sewer district, volunteer and non-profit representatives to collectively work on shaker lakes parklands management. Dbwp continues to serve the central lake erie basin collaborative (cleb) steering committee, one of five organizations to serve the collaborative in this capacity. Executive director emily kao also serves on the restore rockefeller park, cuyahoga areas of concern, cleveland cultural gardens federation, and other committees. Dbwp spent many planning and education hours on a dam removal controversy in our watershed, which was initiated by neorsd and the cities of cleveland heights and shaker heights. Restoration: dbwp was awarded a healthy urban tree canopy grant from cuyahoga county for approximately 27,594.00 to maintain more than 60 historic trees in rockefeller park, and a 15,000 grant from the cleveland tree coalition to give away 200 native trees to cleveland residents. Dbwp received a neorsd watershed service agreement for 45,000, and many other program related grants to support events and outreach in the watershed. We also received a 100% cost-waiver from the usace through their planning assistance for states program to conduct a complete ecological assessment in the rockefeller reach of the doan brook. This assessment is valued at 235,000.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 71.7%; rating input score 72
  • Program expense ratio: 87.9%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: $69.93 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 81; 81st 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 18.7%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 21.7%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13.7% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.9% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 71.7% of revenue deployed · 87.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $514K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $76K · 19 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

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

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.