Pacific Coast Fish Wildlife & Wetlands Restoration Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
680259824
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Arcata, CA, USA
Phone
7078395664
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,206,599
Expenses
$3,120,602
Assets
$754,048
Liabilities
$418,240

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DON BANDUCCI (PRESIDENT)
  • MARGO MOORHOUSE (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • DON BANDUCCI (PRESIDENT)
  • MARGO MOORHOUSE (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MITCHELL E FARRO (SECRETARY/EXECUTIVE OFFICE)

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

Fish, wildlife, and wetlands restoration

What it reported doing in 2025

Watershed assessment and project designthis project involves completion of extensive field survey work to identify sites with the potential for future sediment delivery to stream channels in the sproul creek watershed. Field data is used to develop a prioritized plan for projects in the watershed that can be implemented to reduce future erosion affecting aquatic resources. Specialized geological consultants provide supervision and quality assurance for the projects. This project involved cooperative efforts with public agencies and multiple private landowners. Project located in sproul creek (eel river tributary)project: q2296506rare plant surveys and wetland delineation mapping. These projects provided survey information and mapping documenting the presence or absence of protected species of rare plants and jurisdictional wetlands as needed by public agencies to design and permit habitat restoration projects. Information was provided to the city of arcata, city of eureka and the nonprofit ducks unlimited to assist in implementing larger projects being developed under their jurisdiction.projects elk river/city of eureka, ducks unlimited state wildlife areas and wallflower

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 93.5%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 96.1%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 9th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • 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: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2.7%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.24; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.55; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.7% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3.4% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 93.5% of revenue deployed · 96.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • 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.

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: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 36/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 14/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.