International Council for Archaeozoology

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
272550122
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2020–2022
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2022, Form 990-N 2013
Location
Athens, GA, USA
Phone
7063736773
Rating
37
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Animal-Related N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$11,632
Expenses
$20,827
Assets
$67,070
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Sarah Kansa (President)
  • Terry O'Connor (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Sarah Kansa (President)
  • Terry O'Connor (Vice President)
  • Suzanne Birch (Treasurer)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The International Council for Archaeozoology is a community of for academics and professionals studying animal bone remains from archaeological sites around the world. Last year we welcomed about 250 new or renewing members and supported one affiliated working group conference. We held our general meeting, which occurs once every four years, in Cairns, Australia in August 2023.We publish two newsletters per year as well as maintain an active listserv, website, and social media.

What it reported doing in 2022

The organization supported its members virtually through maintenance of our website, newsletters, social media, and email listserv. We also granted funds to a student/early career conference and supported participants at our 2023 meeting.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 90% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -79%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.22; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -150% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.7% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.7% per year; rating input score 0; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2020 to 2022
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.