Duxbury Beach Reservation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
510173192
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Duxbury, MA, USA
Phone
7815630054
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Natural Resources Conservation and Protection

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,960,494
Expenses
$2,818,027
Assets
$6,822,453
Liabilities
$21,222

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SUE ROURKE (PRESIDENT)
  • JOSEPH GRADY JR (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • CRISTIN LUTTAZI (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • CRISTIN LUTTAZI (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $184,753 total reported compensation
  • JOSEPH GRADY JR (VICE PRESIDENT): $54,657 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Preserve duxbury beach to safeguard adjacent bays and mainland, protect wildlife and vegetation while welcoming the public to enjoy.

What it reported doing in 2024

Coastal resilience: dbr utilizes a green infrastructure approach to coastal management. This approach involves coastal resiliency projects to create living shorelines using native vegetation and dune and beach nourishment to reduce wave and wind velocity and minimize storm alterations. To proactively strengthen and preserve the barrier beach, the reservation works with partners to monitor changes in the barrier beach, model future predictive processes, and analyze outcomes. Large-scale projects are undertaken, supported by data-driven analysis. This proactive work and continuous maintenance includes materials from fine sand to cobble, beach grass to woody vegetation, and fence installation where appropriate.

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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 62
  • Accountability: 89
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.1%; rating input score 94
  • Program expense ratio: 92.1%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.4 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90%; rating input score 90; 21st 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: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.8%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.42; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.5%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 26.5% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.1% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 94.1% of revenue deployed · 92.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 10 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $2.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $185K · 11 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $2.1M reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 39/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 50/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.