Maine Center for Coastal Fisheries

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
270069386
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2022
Location
Stonington, ME, USA
Phone
2073672708
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Marine Science and Oceanography

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,984,270
Expenses
$1,754,769
Assets
$1,846,540
Liabilities
$238,053

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Alexa Dayton (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Alexa Dayton (Executive Director): $158,200 total reported compensation
  • John McMillan (Director): $13,284 total reported compensation
  • David Tarr (Director): $2,250 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Secure a sustainable future for fisheries and fishing communities in Eastern Maine and beyond.

What it reported doing in 2024

Education programs include the Eastern Maine Skippers Program which is the major educational program of the Organization. The Organization serves as fiscal and organizational home for the collaborative program that provides aspiring commercial fishermen in eastern Maine high schools and in their early careers with the core knowledge and skills needed to be successful in the 21st century, on the water or in other careers. It prepares students to be effective participants in fisheries co-management roles: as fishermen, scientists, or regulators. (Continues on schedule O)Education also includes the Organization's Fisheries Education Center at its waterfront headquarters, with touch tank, interactive wall, and a virtual reality experience that provides fisheries information for all ages. Additional educational outreach to the public includes a summer internship program, a monthly Lunch and Learn webinar series, a weekly newspaper column, and hosting college field trips.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 77% for direct work, and 23% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - Most voting board members are independent and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 56
  • Transparency & Controls: 61
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 57.4%; rating input score 57
  • Program expense ratio: 64.5%; rating input score 64
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.34 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Limited
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.3%; rating input score 99; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 11.6%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.05; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.9%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.3% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.1% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 57.4% of revenue deployed · 64.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $158K · 17 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 38 of 39 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 9 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 6 filed related-organization links
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 57/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 28/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 44/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 37/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 39/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.