Riverside Conservancy Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
821904099
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2018
Location
Edgewater, FL, USA
Phone
3869567555
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management

Reported finances

Revenue
$277,731
Expenses
$250,941
Assets
$1,206,086
Liabilities
$4,413

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KELLI MCGEE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • KELLI MCGEE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $64,836 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To create and expand sustainable living shorelines through educational outreach and land conservancy programs that utilize community-engaged design and to promote the heritage of working waterfronts and healthy habitats for the benefit of the indian river lagoon and for the greater public health, economic prosperity and recreation of the surrounding communities.

What it reported doing in 2024

Public education & outreach.education is an important part of conservation. What we want to achieve is not only physical ecological conservation, but also an understanding that a healthy community relies on harmony between individuals and the nature around them. The riverside internship program, envirothon, regional science fair, and the shore symposium are all investments in students and future generations of eco-ambassadors. The conservancy also hosted monthly lagoon lectures, the protect our lagoon academy, and several public workshops with local universities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 89% 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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 55
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 54.2%; rating input score 54
  • Program expense ratio: 59.9%; rating input score 60
  • Fundraising efficiency: $12.15 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 9.6%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.81; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 25.8%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -22.8% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.9% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 54.2% of revenue deployed · 59.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $150K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $65K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 54/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 45/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 52/100.