Marin City Climate Resilience

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
934550663
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Sausalito, CA, USA
Phone
4153247080
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,082,775
Expenses
$411,271
Assets
$712,921
Liabilities
$32,417

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Terrie Green (Executive Director)
  • Gail Theller (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Terrie Green (Executive Director): $91,185 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Marin City Climate Resilience is an African American-led environmental organization advocating for climate resilience and health justice for Marin City, CA, by promoting equitable planning, resource allocation, and community preparedness.

What it reported doing in 2024

Community Education and Activation for Air Monitoring During this reporting period, the Marin City Climate Resilience (MCCR) project, in collaboration with a regional air quality agency and a specialized environmental design firm, completed foundational planning and execution steps for its community-led air quality initiative. Project partners finalized the Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP), which was subsequently used to develop and align partner work plans for the program's activities. Essential preparatory milestones were achieved, including the ordering and acquisition of all air pollution monitoring equipment for deployment in homes and modeling-informed outdoor locations, and conducting initial community engagement with Youth leaders (Dec 2024). Furthermore, all partners met in the second quarter to review compliance with the workplan and QAPP, and to clarify the in-home assessment plan and overall community monitoring strategy. Concurrently, the environmental design firm commenced the development of the initial Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) model, successfully developing a 3D digital twin and environmental models. This modeling work is actively underway, with the objective of scientifically guiding the optimal design and placement of the sensor network and supporting the development of the comprehensive monitoring plan.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 87% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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: 59
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 70
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 34.3%; rating input score 34
  • Program expense ratio: 90.3%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $212.58 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 62%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.73; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 22.2%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 34.3% of revenue deployed · 90.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $371K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $91K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 34/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.