Marine Mammal Alliance Nantucket
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 815294887
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2020–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Jul 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2017
- Location
- Nantucket, MA, USA
- Phone
- (833) 667-6626
- Rating
- 79
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Animal Protection and Welfare
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $141,923
- Expenses
- $105,545
- Assets
- $246,059
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Kim Schulam (Vice President)
- Sally Knutzen (President)
People named in this filing
- Stephen St Pierre (Board Member)
- Eric Savetsky (Board Member)
- Thomas Kilgore (Board Member)
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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To protect, rescue, and advocate for marine mammals on Nantucket through response, education, and collaboration.
What it reported doing in 2025
To respond, rescue and protect the marine mammals on and around Nantucket. This includes collecting date on live and dead animals to be used for scientific research..
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 96% 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 a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 61
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 70
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 54.7%; rating input score 55
- Program expense ratio: 70.8%; rating input score 71
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 25.6%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.33; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 51%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 43.4% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 23.5% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 24.4% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 3 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 54.7% of revenue deployed · 70.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $75K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
- 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 55/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.