Friends of Bonobos

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
200347301
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Durham, NC, USA
Phone
9197179572
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Wildlife Preservation, Protection

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,549,566
Expenses
$1,737,116
Assets
$449,271
Liabilities
$94,636

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DOMINIQUE MOREL (PRESIDENT)
  • REBECCA ROSE (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ARIEL ROGERS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ARIEL ROGERS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $164,166 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

We're on a mission to save and protect bonobos and their rainforest home through rescue, sanctuary, and rewilding; by partnering with local communities to tackle root causes and save rainforests; and by raising the profile of bonobos locally and globally.

What it reported doing in 2024

Support to les amis des bonobos du congo (abc) non-profit for conservation programs: rescue, rehabilitation, and care for orphaned bonobos at the only bonobo sanctuary in the world; rewilding of bonobos in a 120,000 acre protected reserve; country-wide education and awareness-building about bonobos and conservation; and community development around protected habitat. Regular payments were made to abc, including grants, direct payment of consultant fees and other program costs on behalf of abc. Raise global awareness and educate the public about the work of abc and the plight of bonobos, reaching over 50 million people annually through online communications including videos, social media posts and website and regular collaboration with international media production teams to produce film, tv and radio shows.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 67% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 67
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 19
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91.4%; rating input score 91
  • Program expense ratio: 81.5%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $17.5 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Pass
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -12.1%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.26; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.5%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.7% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14.2% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.9% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 91.4% of revenue deployed · 81.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $164K · 13 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 55/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 12/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 39/100.