Gulf of Mexico Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521692642
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014
Location
Corpus Christi, TX, USA
Phone
3618823939
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Marine Science and Oceanography

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$838,713
Expenses
$856,970
Assets
$2,685,999
Liabilities
$102,886

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • DOKKEN DR QUENTON (EXEC. DIRECT): $175,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To promote and facilitate conservation of the gulf of mexico, its resources, and economic productivity through education, public awareness, research, and leadership.

What it reported doing in 2014

Education outreach programs related to the gulf of mexico focus on two primary groups, students and teachers. The science and spanish club network is composed of clubs and students from 5th to 12th grade. The programs involve students under the theme of "living and working in the coastal zone." approximately 400 students participate each year. The down under out yonder coral reef ecology program and intracoastal waterway exploration program are for teachers. The programs take teachers from across the united states into the marine habitats of the flower garden banks national marine sanctuary and the coastal habitats along the intracoastal waterway teaching them the environmental and economic issues of the gulf of mexico. All programs are offered at no cost to the participant, students and teachers.

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 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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 66.6%; rating input score 67
  • Program expense ratio: 65.1%; rating input score 65
  • Fundraising efficiency: $25.92 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: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2.2%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.13; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20.4%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -37% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -54.2% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.7% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 66.6% of revenue deployed · 65.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $558K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $175K · 18 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2011 to 2014
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.