Environmental Protection Information Center
Legal name: Environmental Protection Information Center Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 942798433
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2020–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Arcata, CA, US
- Phone
- (707)-822-7711
- Rating
- 77
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Alliance/Advocacy Organizations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $737,556
- Expenses
- $513,852
- Assets
- $771,109
- Liabilities
- $22,117
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
9 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Nathan Madsen (President)
- Marie Garabedian (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- Nathan Madsen (President)
- Noah Levy (Board Member)
- Will Suiter (Secretary)
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
The Environmental Protection Information Center (EPIC) is a grassroots 501(c)(3) non-profit environmental organization founded in 1977 that advocates for the science-based protection and restoration of Northwest California’s forests, watersheds, and wildlife with an integrated approach combining public education, citizen advocacy, and strategic litigation.
What it reported doing in 2025
- Commented on nearly every timber sale proposed on more than five million acres - Helped champion forward the states goal of conserving 30% of land and coastal waters by the year 2030 by helping coordinate the Power in Nature coalition - Worked with lawmakers and local communities around Jackson Demonstration State Forest to hold Cal Fire accountable in developing a new management plan with environmental review under CA Environmental Quality Act
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. 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: 67
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 70
- Sustainability: 70
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 59.2%; rating input score 59
- Program expense ratio: 84.4%; rating input score 84
- Fundraising efficiency: $23.17 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 59; 59th 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: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- 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: 30.3%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.5; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 21.2% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 13.4% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 11.4% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 8 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 3 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 59.2% of revenue deployed · 84.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $434K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
- Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 59/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 59/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 49/100.