Forest Trends Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 522135531
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2015–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Washington, DC, USA
- Phone
- 2022983000
- Rating
- 83
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Forest Conservation
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $6,019,529
- Expenses
- $8,585,215
- Assets
- $6,937,507
- Liabilities
- $3,499,597
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
24 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MICHAEL JENKINS (PRESIDENT & CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- MICHAEL JENKINS (PRESIDENT & CEO): $327,864 total reported compensation
- OLY BRACHO (CFO): $300,740 total reported compensation
- PHUC XUAN (DIRECTOR, PROGRAM MEKONG): $250,839 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Forest trends works to drive innovation in environmental finance to support resilient ecosystems and communities. Through its core initiatives-including forest policy, trade & finance, water, and communities-forest trends develops data, (continued on schedule o)tools, and partnerships that promote sustainable resource management, strengthen local and indigenous land rights, and support market-based solutions to environmental challenges. These programs collectively advance policy development, improve transparency in supply chains, and expand financing mechanisms for conservation and sustainable livelihoods.
What it reported doing in 2025
Ecosystem marketplace: launched as a web-based information platform in 2004, ecosystem marketplace publishes newsletters, breaking news, original feature articles and major reports about market-based approaches to conserving ecosystem services. Beginning in 2007, staff began collecting survey data to inform the first-ever "state of the voluntary carbon markets" report; since then, coverage has expanded to include forest carbon, watershed investments and biodiversity in our signature "state of" market analysis report format. Lately, em has explored new topics of interest to our traditional markets (e.g., the buyers' report), expanded our coverage to new focal topics (e.g., supply change, and the conservation investment survey), and increased our external advising and consulting opportunities (e.g., global alliance for clean cookstoves, forest stewardship council).em believes that transparency is a hallmark of robust markets and that by providing freely-accessible information, we can facilitate transactions (thereby lowering transaction costs) and also catalyze new thinking and spur the development of new markets and the infrastructure that supports them. With em's high quality market intelligence, project developers can better manage and sell ecosystem services; buyers can better understand the markets and their legitimacy; policy makers can learn from past policies to create more enabling environments for markets; and academics can better understand the real-world challenges and trends of payments for ecosystem services.
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 90% 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. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 92
- Transparency & Controls: 79
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 12
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 81.4%; rating input score 81
- Fundraising efficiency: $82.18 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
- Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
- Requires narrative reports: Fail
- Conducts field audits: Fail
- May suspend future funding: Fail
- Requires financial reports: Pass
- Conducts site visits: Pass
- Requires grant agreements: Fail
- May require repayment: Fail
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 75th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- 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: -42.6%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.81; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.5; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 26.3%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 2.9% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 81.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 6 filed program accomplishments · $7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $328K · 24 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $921K reported
- Consistency: 38 of 38 current checks pass
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 11 filing years from 2015 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 12 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 2 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 5 of 8 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 16/100.