Marine Resources Development Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 670258256
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2022
- Location
- Key Largo, FL, USA
- Phone
- 3054511139
- Rating
- 55
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Marine Science and Oceanography
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $6,747,764
- Expenses
- $11,306,421
- Assets
- $27,843,607
- Liabilities
- $9,332,181
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
11 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- GINETTE HUGHES (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- GINETTE HUGHES (CEO): $84,761 total reported compensation
- SARAH EGNER (OFFICER): $64,618 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
We inspire today's students to become tomorrow's ocean protectors through engaging, hands-on activities, guided field trips, virtual classes, free learning resources, and professional development workshops. Our marinelab undersea laboratory museum invites the public to experience what it was like to live and work in an undersea research station.
What it reported doing in 2024
Our programs introduced 7,000 people to marine science concepts through hands-on labs, discussion activities, citizen science projects, and snorkeling explorations by boat. For many participants, this is their first experience of the ocean. Over 100 teachers, including several from caribbean nations, participated in several professional development workshops. Our curriculum is based on peer-reviewed science. Field experiences have been proven to increase retention of knowledge, plus the students are experiencing nature unplugged in an increasingly plugged-in world. Virtual emarinelab programs include interacting with a live marine science instructor and reached 1800 participants in 2023. Free learning resources are available for teachers and homeschooling families.
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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
MIXED - 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 25
- Transparency & Controls: 86
- Accountability: 61
- Sustainability: 33
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 32.6%; rating input score 33
- Program expense ratio: 19.4%; rating input score 19
- Fundraising efficiency: $0.47 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 10th 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: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 22
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- 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: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -67.6%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.46; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.34; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 1.3%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 7.1% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 32.6% of revenue deployed · 19.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 9 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2.2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $85K · 11 people listed
- Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 33/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 19/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 8 not reported.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 2/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.