Natural Cork Council

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
934522842
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2023
Location
Salem, OR, USA
Phone
7074864684
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$207,004
Expenses
$212,015
Assets
$7,144
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • M HAUTALA (President)
  • C HOLMAN (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • M HAUTALA (President)
  • C HOLMAN (Vice President)
  • M BARTLETT (Secretary)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

THE NCC is dedicated to educating wine consumers and the wine industry about the importance and benefits of cork as the most sustainable wine closure

What it reported doing in 2025

In 2025 the NCC launched a public awareness campaign targeting the environmental and sustainable efforts by our organization and the Portuguese government. This campaign focused on the regenerative cork forest planting projects which included a fertigation project that is aimed at developing faster growing and more climate resistant cork trees. We also helped fund a land reclamation project which takes land that has been abandoned and re-plants cork oak to prevent forest fires, reduce the effects of desertification and soil erosion. The NCC has partnered with the Cork Collective to remove millions of cork stoppers from our landfills and upcycle them into consumer and sports related products. To date the Cork Collective project has removed over 2 million corks from landfills.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 93% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 97.3%; rating input score 97
  • Program expense ratio: 95%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2.4%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.03; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 78.8% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -51.9% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 97.3% of revenue deployed · 95% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 5 board members independent · 0 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $201K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 30/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 4/100.