Phoenix Landing Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
870659457
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Alexander, NC, USA
Phone
8667495634
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Bird Sanctuary, Preserve

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$344,580
Expenses
$353,503
Assets
$2,220,317
Liabilities
$5,064

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Ann Brooks (President and Co-Founder)

People named in this filing

  • Ann Brooks (President and Co-Founder)
  • Abe Greenberg (Treasurer)
  • Kathy May (Secretary and Co-Founder)

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

Phoenix Landing Foundation is an organization dedicated to the welfare of parrots through its adoption, education, and conservation programs. It also promotes enhanced avian education for veterinary students and standards of care for breeders, pet stores, and welfare organizations.

What it reported doing in 2025

Our conservation support for 2025 went to two parrot conservation groups in Brazil: Instituto Araras Azul and Buracas das Araras. These donations were made possible by those who went on our Brazil ecotour in September 2025. We also supported two parrot conservation groups in Costa Rica: The Macaw Recovery Network and Rescate Rescue Center. These donations were made possible by those who went on our Costa Rica ecotour in January 2025. We also were a sponsor of the Psittacine Congress in 2025.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 82% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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.
  • 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. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 98
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 97.3%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: $264.76 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 20th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2.6%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.28; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.6% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 97.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $344K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 28 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 30/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grants require schedule f did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.