Native Future

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
453191642
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2021, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Scarborough, ME, USA
Phone
8022367992
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
International Economic Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$286,586
Expenses
$350,538
Assets
$231,388
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Marsha Kellogg (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Marsha Kellogg (President): $62,500 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To partner with indigenous communities in Panama to protect their land rights, support their stewardship of their rainforest ecosystems, and educate their youth.

What it reported doing in 2024

66,000 acres were monitored. Two forest fires, approximately 100 hectares, were successfully extinguished in Puerto Lara and Maje by trained Wounaan volunteer forest fire fighters. Thirty (30) people are under investigation by the Government of Panamas environmental authorities for illegal deforestation in four Wounaan communities. The project, Enhancing Indigenous Territorial Security and Environmental Governance in East Panama and Darien, funded by a grant from the US State Department, was launched to formalize and expand the unique territorial monitoring cooperation between Wounaan communities and Panamas environmental authorities that is holding individuals accountable for violating Panamas environmental laws. The community of Aruza regained their right to apply for all 8,000 hectares of their land, and re-submitted their collective title application to Panamas National Land Authority.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 48% for direct work, and 52% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 93
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 59
  • Sustainability: 27
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 88.7%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: $29.2 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 81.8%; rating input score 82; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 78.1%; rating input score 78; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -22.3%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.66; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.8%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 19.3% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.6% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.8% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 88.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 6 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $310K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $62K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 27 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 13/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.