G E M Environmental Nfp
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 821017612
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2018–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2017
- Location
- Prescott, AZ, USA
- Phone
- 9289102001
- Rating
- 83
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Environmental Quality, Protection, and Beautification N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $947,854
- Expenses
- $985,829
- Assets
- $441,002
- Liabilities
- $267,062
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- WELSH E (PRES/CEO/BOARD CHAIR)
Highest reported compensation
- WELSH E (PRES/CEO/BOARD CHAIR): $58,556 total reported compensation
- MCDONOUGH A (VP): $51,589 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 provide safe access to public lands and use the organization's work as a means to inspire others to help their communities by raising money to provide scholarships and internships to students and recent graduates in stem related fields and accredited institutions.
What it reported doing in 2024
Gem for stem: (includes community service, community nature center, little free libraries.)- thisis the umbrella charity side which encompasses miscellaneous small projects. Gem corps -(includesamericorps az) - a workforce development program designed to cross train participants in scientific and conservation field work through hands-on learning and professional development training. Education to provide field experience to foster academic achievement, to assist students in developing relationships with industry professionals and to provide opportunities for integrated learning and community engagement. Scholarship - to provide scholarships to students and recent graduates in stem related field of accredited institutions and interested in gaining industry related experience and possible opportunities to obtain gainful employment within the scientific community.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 65% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- 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
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: 83
- Transparency & Controls: 86
- Accountability: 87
- Sustainability: 24
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 83.9%; rating input score 84
- Program expense ratio: 80.7%; rating input score 81
- Fundraising efficiency: $65.32 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 22nd 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: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 20th 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: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -4%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.45; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.61; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 11.2%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 29.6% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 20.5% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 21.2% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 83.9% of revenue deployed · 80.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $795K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $59K · 7 people listed
- Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 6 filing years from 2018 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
- 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 26/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 13/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.