Natural Areas Conservancy Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 461791849
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2019–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2017
- Location
- New York, NY, USA
- Phone
- 9089126113
- Rating
- 78
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Natural Resources Conservation and Protection
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,899,247
- Expenses
- $3,379,673
- Assets
- $5,840,828
- Liabilities
- $157,330
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
35 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- SARAH CHARLOP-POWERS (EXECUTIVE DIR.): $258,996 total reported compensation
- ELIZABETH MARRA (DEPUTY DIR. PUBLIC PRGM AND OPS.): $164,676 total reported compensation
- SHANNON JORDY (DEP DIR OF COM & EXT AFFAI): $159,859 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 natural areas conservancy champions urban natural areas in New York city and across the nation through innovative research, partnerships, and advocacy. We increase the health and resilience of urban forests and wetlands, catalyze connections between people and nature, and strengthen the environmental workforce.working in partnership with the New York city department of parks and recreation (nyc parks), we seek to ensure the high-quality management of nyc's 20,000 acres of forests and wetlands. Driving the nac's work is the recognition that natural areas are increasingly vital to sustaining air quality, improving public health, providing new yorkers with access to nature, and strengthening our communities. Our work includes conducting scientific research, restoring natural habitats, developing tools to inform data-driven management, and increasing awareness and opportunities for the public to experience nyc's abundant nature.
What it reported doing in 2024
Nyc public programs: in 2024, our workforce and internship program, hosted in partnership with the city university of New York (cuny), launched our new year-round urban nature, ecology, stewardship, and training (nest) effort. This fellowship provides over 800 hours of technical training, stewardship activities, and professional development to make our fellows competitive for early-career positions in natural resource management. Our cuny student interns supported staff scientists from the nac and the nyc parks & recreation department (nyc parks) on the 10-year re-collection of ecological assessment data in nyc forests and wetlands, as well as trail mapping in floyd bennett field and native seed propagation. (continued on schedule o)we also served 15 high school interns with our expanded student urban nature (sun) high school paid internship program, serving locations in both queens and staten island. Our high school interns presented their research projects on nyc forests and wetlands at a symposium at the american museum of natural history with nearly 300 other high school stem students. Additionally, the nac's trails team continued to increase access to New York city's 300 miles of nature trails with more programming for seasonal natural areas tours and weekly trainings, made possible by expanding the team with a trails volunteer coordinator. We also hosted our 6th annual trail techniques training for practitioners around the city who work on trails and provided a week-long training and symposium to members of nyc parks and other local conservancies. Finally, we worked with over 400 volunteers, who completed more than 2,300 hours of work to improve access to nyc's natural areas.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 82% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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 the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 75
- Transparency & Controls: 75
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 30
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 85.9%; rating input score 86
- Program expense ratio: 73.5%; rating input score 74
- Fundraising efficiency: $5.81 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -16.6%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.73; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 29.7%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 85.9% of revenue deployed · 73.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 28 of 28 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2.5M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $259K · 35 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
- 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 21/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 57/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.