Paso Pacifico

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
203396421
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Ventura, CA, USA
Phone
8056437044
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Wildlife Preservation, Protection

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$705,401
Expenses
$558,886
Assets
$381,131
Liabilities
$24,395

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Christy Reich (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Sarah Otterstrom PhD (Exec Director): $28,036 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

We apply principles of ecology to ensure that our innovative programs integrate advances in scientific and economic understanding to ensure the viability of coastal forests and the livelihoods of the people who live in them.

What it reported doing in 2024

Through programs informed by the most cutting-edge conservation science and implemented through close cooperation with local communities, Paso Pacifico is making leaps for ecosystem conservation. By rebuilding forests and connecting ecosystems from land to sea, we are actively combating climate change and saving wildlife, such as endangered sea turtle, spider monkey, and yellow-naped parrot species.Paso Pacifico is also engaged in monitoring primates and forest carnivores, developing protected areas, building capacity for sustainable tourism including reforestation, protecting endangered frogs and parrots, monitoring coral reef, environmental education, and migratory bird monitoring.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 76% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 77% for direct work, and 23% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 63
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 57
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 56.9%; rating input score 57
  • Program expense ratio: 71.8%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: $31.36 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 20.8%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.68; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -5.1% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.6% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -7.1% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 56.9% of revenue deployed · 71.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $401K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $28K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 57/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 49/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 53/100.