Ecology Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
941703351
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Berkeley, CA, USA
Phone
5105261131
Rating
87
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Natural Resources Conservation and Protection

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$18,141,347
Expenses
$17,773,012
Assets
$8,844,960
Liabilities
$4,432,725

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • REBECCA PRAGER (BOARD PRESIDENT)
  • KAD SMITH (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MARTIN BOURQUE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARTIN BOURQUE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $202,200 total reported compensation
  • BEN MAH (RECYLING DRIVER): $154,387 total reported compensation
  • ENCARNACION RIVERA (RECYLING DRIVER): $137,916 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Inspiring and building a sustainable, healthy, and just future for the east bay, California, and beyond.

What it reported doing in 2024

Internal programs include recycling program and other internal programs: recycling: the center operates the residential curbside recycling program for the city of berkeley. Curbside recycling collections is a key form of waste reduction and diverts recycling materials from incinerators and landfills. The center also educates on the ecological benefits of recycling.other internal programs: the center also operates the following programs:* education and engagement program to provide environmental resource information and educate the public on sustainable living practices.* store to supply the community with a unique and hard-to-find selection of environmental products, gifts, books, and other resources.* a youth environmental academy to educate and prepare the next generation of environmental leaders.* farmer's market to provide a market for small scale regional farmers by linking them to urban communities and to promote and educate the community about sustainable agriculture.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 95% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 65% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 91
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91.3%; rating input score 91
  • Program expense ratio: 92.9%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: $152.15 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.4%; rating input score 98; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: 2%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.5; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.5; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.3% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.9% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.1% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 91.3% of revenue deployed · 92.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $16.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $202K · 12 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $1.1M reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 35 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 56 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 50 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 42/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 50/100.