Ecological Building Network
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 202986662
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2020–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2024
- Location
- San Rafael, CA, United States
- Phone
- 4154795751
- Rating
- 65
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Alliance/Advocacy
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $262,978
- Expenses
- $66,005
- Assets
- $207,103
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
People named in this filing
- Bruce King (Director)
- Sarah King (Secretary Treasurer)
- Anne Banta (Board Member)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Ecological Building Network fosters develops and distributes information on low-carbon sustainable building practices. Sarah Weller King has over 40 years of fund raising and marketing communications experience, operating her own free-lance consulting business with over 75 non-profit organizations in the local, regional, national, and international arenas. For EBNet, she is responsible for all managemant and administration, budget development and implementation, and reporting. She is one of the founding parents of Dedication to Special Education, an organization committed to raising money to support Special Education in Marin County, California. She served as co-chair for 20 years. Anne Banta Corporate Marketing and Communications consultant. Banta has launched over 36 start-ups and developed messaging for 1.
What it reported doing in 2025
BuildWell Media Project final payment for work on the 8 short videos completed in 2024. EBNet did not have the cash flow to pay the independent contractors working on the project so Bruce and Sarah King lent EBNet $10000 to cover those costs. When EBNet donors provided their annual contributions EBNet was able to repay the Kings the $10000 so that amount appears as a project expense related to the BuildWell Media project.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. 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: 50
- Transparency & Controls: 84
- Accountability: 51
- Sustainability: 83
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 20.9%; rating input score 21
- Program expense ratio: 83.4%; rating input score 83
- Fundraising efficiency: $7,955.82 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 10th 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: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 74.9%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.14; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 10.3% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 29.8% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 36.5% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 20.9% of revenue deployed · 83.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 6 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $65K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
- Consistency: 38 of 40 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2020 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 21/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX AllOtherExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.