Sea-Run Brook Trout Coalition Corp
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 274568873
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2011–2018
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2018
- Location
- Newburyport, MA, USA
- Phone
- 5085381857
- Rating
- 68
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Animal Protection and Welfare
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $29,753
- Expenses
- $21,913
- Assets
- $24,089
- Liabilities
- $1,417
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
2 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Geoffrey Day (Executive Director)
People named in this filing
- Geoffrey Day (Executive Director)
- Dwayne Shaw (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To raise funds for and to assist in the implementation of projects that acquire, compile, and disseminate scientific, cultural, and historical information about sea-run brook trout, as well as the preservation and protection of sea-run brook trout and their habitat. Said organization is organized exclusively for charitable, educational, and scientific purposes, for such purposes, by making of distributions to organizations that qualify as exempt organizations under section 501 (c) (3) of the Internal Revenue code, or corresponding section of any future tax code.
What it reported doing in 2018
Funding research supporting the restoration of fisheries lost to overfishing and damaged habitat, and the conservation of sea-run brook trout in New England.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 77% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 40
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 57
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 35.7%; rating input score 36
- Program expense ratio: 48.5%; rating input score 48
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 26.4%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.1; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 24.8%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 8.9% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 35.7% of revenue deployed · 48.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $11K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2011 to 2018
- 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 36/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 48/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 50/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.