Pacific Environment and Resources Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
942628924
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
San Francisco, CA, USA
Phone
4153998850
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Forest Conservation

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$10,981,159
Expenses
$9,738,642
Assets
$13,296,272
Liabilities
$401,796

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SHANNON WRIGHT (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • SHANNON WRIGHT (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $242,753 total reported compensation
  • TASHIA OWENS (DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES): $182,067 total reported compensation
  • BARBARA KELSO (DIRECTOR OF ADVANCEMENT): $181,946 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Scientific/education on environmental issues. Protects the environment of the pacific rim by strengthening local environmental leadership in china, the arctic, Alaska, and California. We provide professional training and resources to conservation leaders and organizations, and we seek to hold governments, corporations, and banks accountable for their actions. With our community partners, we have protected old growth forest and endangered species; engaged oil, gas, mining, and timber companies to address local concerns; cleaned up polluting factories; and improved socal and environmental practices at global financial institutions.

What it reported doing in 2024

Climate: we lead coalition campaigns and collaborate with local partners to reduce climate-polluting greenhouse gas emissions (ghgs) by getting ships off fossil fuels.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 79% for direct work, and 21% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 64
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 59
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 77.2%; rating input score 77
  • Program expense ratio: 86.8%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $20.06 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Pass
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 23.9%; rating input score 24; 9th 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 11.3%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.37; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.9%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 20.7% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 20.6% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 21.6% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 77.2% of revenue deployed · 86.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $8.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $243K · 15 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 24/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 57/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 48/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.