National Conservation Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
900136120
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2025476223
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Reported finances

Revenue
$768,169
Expenses
$680,436
Assets
$944,384
Liabilities
$182,026

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

Leadership & pay

28 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TIM PALMER (TREASURER, NACD IMMEDIATE PAST-PRESIDENT)
  • KIM LAFLEUR (NACD PAST-PRESIDENT)
  • JEREMY PETERS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • BRENT VAN DYKE (CHAIR)
  • TIM REICH (VICE CHAIR)
  • TIM PALMER (TREASURER, NACD IMMEDIATE PAST-PRESIDENT)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

The purpose of the national conservation foundation is to provide funds for the programs and services of the conservation districts of america continued schedule o

What it reported doing in 2024

The next generation leadership institute ngli is ready to take conservation leaders to the next level by training individuals to rise to the challenge of understanding and directing national, collaborative efforts in locally- led conservation. The goals of ngli are to equip conservation district leaders to become national leaders of tomorrow through personal, civic and organizational leadership development in order to meet the future needs of natural resources management. By increasing their capacity to navigate and manage complex current and future conservation challenges at the national level, which impact conservation districts across the united states.

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 90% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 59
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73.5%; rating input score 74
  • Program expense ratio: 82%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $106.9 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 93.4%; rating input score 93; 41st 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: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 11.4%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.39; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.19; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.5% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.3% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 73.5% of revenue deployed · 82% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 28 of 28 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $558K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 28 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 24 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.