San Diego Fishermens Working Group

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
273978857
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-N 2019
Location
Lakeside, CA, USA
Phone
6199577121
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management

Reported finances

Revenue
$252,538
Expenses
$205,878
Assets
$63,592
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PETER G HALMAY (CEO)

People named in this filing

  • PETER G HALMAY (CEO)
  • MATT EVERINGHAM (Director)
  • DAVID HAWORTH (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

San Diego Fishermens Working Group is working to squarely place in the publics mind the importance of commercial fishing to our regions food security, and to the economic, social, and cultural fabric of the greater San Diego region. SDFWG represents the fishing men and women of the greater San Diego region. The nine person Board of Director represents each of the different fisheries and methods found in our area.

What it reported doing in 2024

During 2024 we supplied the Jacobs and Cushman San Diego FoodBank with $100,000 of fish through a contract with the Foodbank. Purchased fish, had it processed, vacuum sealed and frozen and delivered. We contributed 100 hours of in kind support to a USDA grant for seafood marketing and participated in an event on the pier called local fish global flavor to promote local fish and fishermen. We also attended an event sponsored by farm bureau to promote the contribution of SDFWG to food security. We obtained and fulfilled a $60,000 grant from the Parker Foundation to continue the Fish to Families program, supplying 6,500 free meals. Also, the we supplied the Port with concept drawings of a new layout for the fishermens marina at Driscolls Wharf.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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 - 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 some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 58
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 81.5%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • 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: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 18.5%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.31; rating input score 16; 16th 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: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 20.7% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.8% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 81.5% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 0 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $206K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 15 of 16 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
  • Review — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization could not be resolved against the register, so the check is unfinished.