San Francisco Bay Bird Observatory
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 942788588
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2015–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- San Jose, CA, USA
- Phone
- 4089466548
- Rating
- 82
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,082,755
- Expenses
- $1,894,818
- Assets
- $1,136,167
- Liabilities
- $177,652
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Chris Overington (Executive Director)
Highest reported compensation
- Chris Overington (Executive Director): $111,625 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The San Francisco Bay Bird Observatory is dedicated to promote sustainability in the Bay Area and beyond by engaging communities in avian science, habitat restoration, and education.
What it reported doing in 2025
Our science programs are the Snowy Plover and Least Tern Program, Waterbird Program, Landbird Program, Climate Change Program, Habitats Program. The Snowy Plover and Least Tern Recovery Program works toward the recovery of the federally threatened Western snowy plover and endangered California least tern. Biologists monitor breeding snowy plovers and least terns by surveying former salt ponds, stormwater retention ponds, and other suitable habitat of the San Francisco Bay where the birds breed. Program biologists work closely with local land managers and restoration projects to implement management practices to help recover the populations of these sensitive species in the Bay. The Waterbirds Program collects crucial data on the ecology and management ecosystems at a landscape-scale across California. Program biologists and over 100 volunteers collect and analyze large-scale data on waterbird abundance, distribution, foraging, breeding, and disease ecology from across the Bay Area. These data inform management of the largest tidal marsh restoration on the Pacific Coast of North America. In 2025 we continued new initiatives on Oakland Herons, phalarope foraging, and North Bay Colonial Waterbird monitoring. We also started several major new efforts: (1) drafting the first ever rangewide model of North American phalaropes with a novel two-species statistical model, (2) expanding our monitoring of gull and corvid abatement effectiveness to a new site in North Bay, (3) a new collaboration banding California Gulls with researchers from San Jose State University, and (4) co-authoring two region-wide analyses of waterbird health, the SF Bay State of the Birds and Our Estuary reports. The Landbird Program's bird banding has been ongoing for 44 years, involved hundreds of community volunteers who we train, and has been the basis of seven scientific papers in the last 5 years. Currently we involve 65 volunteers in bird banding, and collaborate with other researchers as well as local students embarking on research careers to understand avian responses to climate change and habitat restoration and improve research methods. We also host dozens of students every year ranging from middle school to college to learn about conservation ecology, in collaboration with the Education-Outreach Program and our Student Opportunities in Avian Research partners.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- 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.
- 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 73
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 88
- Sustainability: 42
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 75.2%; rating input score 75
- Program expense ratio: 82.3%; rating input score 82
- Fundraising efficiency: $9.49 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 34; 34th 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: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 9%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.6; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.16; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 5.9%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 7% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 9.6% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 13.3% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 75.2% of revenue deployed · 82.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 8 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.6M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $112K · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 34/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 53/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 40/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 51/100.