Giraffe Conservation Foundation USA

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
812749463
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Orlando, FL, USA
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Relief

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,433,254
Expenses
$1,435,179
Assets
$4,854,871
Liabilities
$1,451

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DR JULIAN FENNESSY (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • STEPHANIE FENNESSY (EXECUTIVE DI): $73,473 total reported compensation
  • DR JULIAN FENNESSY (PRESIDENT): $70,189 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The giraffe conservation foundation USA (gcf-USA) is dedicated to a sustainable future for all giraffe in africa by providing support to organizations working to conserve giraffe and their habitat. Gcf-USA selects partners that are actively involved in giraffe conservation in african range states and that work together in a collaborative manner. These partners include governments, ngos, researchers, conservationists, and wildlife managers throughout africa and internationally; they are working to identify and provide long-term conservation and management solutions for all giraffe populations in the wild. Giraffe conservation foundation trust (gcf-t) in namibia has the distinction of being our primary partner of choice. Gcf-t is a strategic non-profit organization that focuses solely on the conservation and management of giraffe in the work throughout africa. Gcf-USA will assist its parners by: -raising funds in the united states and internationally for giraffe conservation projects, ed

What it reported doing in 2025

The giraffe conservation foundation USA (gcf-USA) is dedicated to a sustainable future for all giraffe in africa by providing support to organizations working to conserve giraffe and their habitat.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 88% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 89% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.6%; rating input score 95
  • Program expense ratio: 87.4%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $34.87 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 69; 69th 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: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • 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; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: -0.1%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.38; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.9% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.8% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 94.6% of revenue deployed · 87.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 8 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $73K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2016 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 29/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 37/100.