Restigouche Atlantic Salmon Preservation Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
132970237
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2128380211
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$111,287
Expenses
$112,875
Assets
$1,071
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • EDGAR M CULLMAN JR (PRESIDENT)
  • JOHN FLETCHER III (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • EDGAR M CULLMAN JR (PRESIDENT)
  • JOHN FLETCHER III (VICE PRESIDENT)

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

The foundation contracted with the restigouche riparian association to fund expenses for necessary wardens, in close cooperation with and under the supervision of the department of natural resources of the province of new brunswick, canada. These personnel, designated assistants & game wardens offered protection to the atlantic salmon during its period in the river system. These activities involved controling poaches, watching for evidence of pollution, monitoring numbers of the fish in the estuary, the river and the spawning pools.

What it reported doing in 2024

Restigouche riparian salmon conservation fund rsc scholarship fund

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 98% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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 the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 6
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • 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: 98.2%; rating input score 98; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: Limited
  • 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: -1.4%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.01; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13.2% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.9% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -12.8% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $113K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 15 of 16 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 36/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.