Madagascar Fauna and Flora Group

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
811656070
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Naples, FL, USA
Phone
2392625409
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Botanical, Horticultural, and Landscape Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$300,440
Expenses
$594,833
Assets
$399,682
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

People named in this filing

  • CLAIRE RAISIN PHD (DIRECTOR)
  • GREGORY DYE (DIRECTOR)
  • THEO PAGEL PHD (DIRECTOR)

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

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

Overview

Mission

The preservation of ecological systems, natural evolutionary processes and endemic species diversity within madagascar.

What it reported doing in 2024

Conservation action - we respond to urgent conservation issues that arise and collaborate on the development of long-term strategies to conserve the region's biodiversity.conservation research - we focus on research that informs conservation action through a deeper understanding of the complex interrelationships of ecosystem processes, species ecological requirements and anthropogenic disturbancesenvironmental education - we provide environmental education opportunities for malagasy youth and raise environmental awareness through radio programs, festivals and at the ivoloina zoo.capacity building - we hold conservation-related workshops, mentor university students, and collaborate with farmers to develop more sustainable farming practices.

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 most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -98%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.67; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.4% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.8% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $595K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 12 of 12 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • 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 scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.