Marine Environmental Sciences Consortium

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
630779657
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Dauphin Island, AL, USA
Phone
1-877-WHALE-HELP
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$33,634,506
Expenses
$31,797,215
Assets
$63,353,668
Liabilities
$36,530,306

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

Leadership & pay

31 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • John Valentine (Executive Director)
  • Dr Quinton T Ross (President Alabama State University)
  • Dr Christopher Roberts (President Auburn University)
  • Dr Don Killingsworth (President Jacksonville State University)
  • Dr Beck Taylor (President Samford University)
  • Dr Willie L Todd Jr (President Talladega College)

Highest reported compensation

  • John Valentine (Executive Director): $252,274 total reported compensation
  • David England (Deputy Director): $200,704 total reported compensation
  • Delbert Smee (Chair, University Programs): $171,663 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 Marine Environmental Sciences Consortium (MESC) facilitates marine science education and research through a consortium of Alabama colleges and universities, operating via the Dauphin Island Sea Lab to provide graduate programs and integrated curricula in marine and environmental sciences.

What it reported doing in 2024

Education, General/Other, The Alabama Aquarium-Exciting visual displays and engaging interactive exhibits present an unforgettable educational experience. Focuses on the four main ecosystems of Mobile Bay, includes and exhibit hall, weather station and living marsh boardwalk. (100,000 visitors per year)

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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 56
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.8%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 89.6%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 5.5%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.99; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.58; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.8%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.3% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.7% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 4 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 84.8% of revenue deployed · 89.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $28.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $252K · 31 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
  • 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: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 9 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 55/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 24/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 52/100.