Forests Forever Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
680201338
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Berkeley, CA, USA
Phone
4159743636
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Natural Resources Conservation and Protection

Reported finances

Revenue
$280,858
Expenses
$317,680
Assets
$212,165
Liabilities
$13,673

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KAREN ERICKSON (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • PAUL HUGHES (Ex Dir. & Secre): $56,398 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To protect and enhance the forests and wildlife habitat of California through educational, legislative, and electoral activities.

What it reported doing in 2024

We generated emails and letters that helped to defeat a scheme to establish for the first time a forest-destructive industry in California that would have exploited the state's forests to manufacture and export wood pellets for overseas electricity generation. On multiple fronts we opposed weakening of federal mature and old-growth forest protections and called for them to be strengthened. This targeted primarily the two largest U.S. land-management agencies with forest holdings under their jurisdiction. We pushed the Forest Service to revise and simplify the system (CARA) through which the public submits input on agency decisions, as provided by the law. We generated grassroots messages to save and strengthen the successful and forest-protective Northwest Forest Plan.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 74% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 60
  • Sustainability: 24
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 88.4%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 78.1%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.15 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 75%; rating input score 75; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -13.1%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.67; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.8%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -5.6% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -6.4% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.7% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 88.4% of revenue deployed · 78.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 4 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $248K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $56K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 18/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 19/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 30/100.