Pajarito Environmental Education Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
850478101
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Los Alamos, NM, USA
Phone
5056620460
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Environmental Education and Outdoor Survival Programs

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,286,283
Expenses
$1,055,067
Assets
$2,129,792
Liabilities
$102,936

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Bonnie Klamm (President)
  • Shelly Wiemann (Former President)
  • Elizabeth Allen (Former President)

People named in this filing

  • Robin Gurule (Treasurer)
  • Kristen Dors (Director)
  • Galen Gisler (Director)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Enriching peoples lives by strengthening their connections to our canyons mesa mountain and skies.

What it reported doing in 2024

Nature Center: PEEC operates the Los Alamos Nature Center for the County of Los Alamos NM. The nature centers hands-on interactive exhibits related to the land animals and flora of the Pajarito Plateau provide a learning experience for visitors of all ages. In addition to an exhibit hall the nature center offers a state-of-the-art planetarium and a wildlife observation room. The outdoor exhibits feature native plant gardens the largest collection of penstemons in the country a tree house and nature play area. The nature center gift shop offers locally-made products and environmentally-friendly items encouraging people to experience the outdoors. During FY25 we welcomed 12,667 visitors to the nature center and 1604 attendees to our planetarium shows.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filed totals do not add up and liabilities are high compared with assets.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 70
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 70.6%; rating input score 71
  • Program expense ratio: 86.1%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $24.09 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 2nd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 18%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.02; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.8% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.1% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 70.6% of revenue deployed · 86.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 7 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $908K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 42 of 44 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 — 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.