Oceans Unmanned Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 812755786
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2021–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2019
- Location
- Santa Barbara, CA, USA
- Phone
- 3017289732
- Rating
- 63
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Natural Resources Conservation and Protection
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $9,469,821
- Expenses
- $8,337,041
- Assets
- $1,724,427
- Liabilities
- $137,624
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Matt Pickett (President)
- Zach Pickett (Vice President)
Highest reported compensation
- Matt Pickett (President): $75,000 total reported compensation
- Brian Taggart (Secretary Treasurer): $43,705 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Oceans Unmanned was formed to protect our oceans and coastal marine environment by facilitating the use of unmanned technologies and promoting their safe and environmentally conscious operation through education and outreach.
What it reported doing in 2025
Oceans Unmanned initiated a collaborative effort with HII this year to execute a training and evaluation program within the Point Mugu Sea Range situated off the coast of Port Hueneme. The primary objective of this initiative is to assess and refine the efficiency of unmanned aerial and surface vehicles. Oceans Unmanned is committed to ensuring the complete safety of the public and marine life during all project operations. It is imperative to highlight that the exercise will strictly prohibit the utilization of live ammunition sound devices underwater or any nets that could pose a threat to sea birds mammals or fish. In support of this endeavor Oceans Unmanned provided small boats and dedicated observers to facilitate the seamless execution of these exercises emphasizing environmental preservation and safety protocols throughout the duration of the year.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 92% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
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: 72
- Transparency & Controls: 77
- Accountability: 18
- Sustainability: 45
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 77.4%; rating input score 77
- Program expense ratio: 88%; rating input score 88
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 80%; rating input score 80; 0th 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- 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: 12%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.21; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 1.4%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 93.4% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 88.5% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 58.8% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 77.4% of revenue deployed · 88% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 4 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $7.3M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $75K · 4 people listed
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.8M reported
- Consistency: 39 of 41 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2021 to 2025
- 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 52/100.
- Review — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization could not be resolved against the register, so the check is unfinished.