Omaha Zoo Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
363297716
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2023
Location
Omaha, Nebraska, US
Phone
402-738-2073
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Wildlife Preservation, Protection

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$26,326,840
Expenses
$24,708,993
Assets
$185,760,101
Liabilities
$600,386

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TINA CHERICA (PRESIDENT & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • TINA CHERICA (PRESIDENT & CEO): $431,711 total reported compensation
  • DR LEE G SIMMONS (VP OF DONOR RELATIONS): $359,926 total reported compensation
  • KILEY THIELE (VP OF DEVELOPMENT): $188,342 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to support Omaha’s Henry Doorly Zoo & Aquarium, starting in our own community – but extending far beyond.

What it reported doing in 2024

The omaha zoo foundation was incorporated as a non-profit corporation to solicit and receive contributions, gifts, grants, devises, and bequests, and to distribute and apply such assets and/or the income therefrom to and for the benefit of the omaha zoological society.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 73% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 97% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - 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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 71
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 93.7%; rating input score 94
  • Program expense ratio: 86.4%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.74 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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; 66th 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: 6.1%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.52; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -15.7% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -10.4% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.2% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 93.7% of revenue deployed · 86.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $21.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $432K · 7 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $298K reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 34/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 57/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.