Hood Canal Coordinating Council

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
912085994
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Poulsbo, WA, USA
Phone
3603940046
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fisheries Resources

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,949,073
Expenses
$1,240,178
Assets
$13,371,489
Liabilities
$11,099,749

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAVID D DICKS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • DAVID HERERRA (VICE PRESIDENT SECRETARY)
  • CHRISTINE ROLFES (PRESIDENT TREASURER)

Highest reported compensation

  • DAVID D DICKS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $130,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The hood canal coordinating council works with partners and communities to advance a shared regional vision to protect and recover hood canals environmental, economic, and cultural wellbeing.

What it reported doing in 2024

Hccc operated as a regional council of governments and non-profit to protect and recover hood canals environmental, economic, and cultural wellbeing. Hccc coordinated local implementation of the summer chum salmon recovery plan . Hccc developed local recovery strategies for salmon and their habitat, coordinated planning, and facilitated the lead entity grant round to prioritize habitat projects for funding recommendation to the governors salmon recovery office. Hccc developed, coordinated, and implemented local ecosystem recovery actions, and served as lio in puget sound partnership action agenda planning and implementation. Hccc collaborated with regional water quality authorities to restore water quality in hood canal. Hccc provided compensatory mitigation in hood canal through the in lieu fee mitigation program.

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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 49
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 74
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 50.5%; rating input score 51
  • Program expense ratio: 61.9%; rating input score 62
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 36.4%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 10.78; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.83; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.5%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.9% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.4% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.7% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 50.5% of revenue deployed · 61.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $768K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $130K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 51/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 8/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.