Seneca Park Zoo Society

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
160905390
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Rochester, NY, USA
Phone
5853367200
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Management & Technical Assistance

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,375,593
Expenses
$4,462,454
Assets
$6,678,001
Liabilities
$801,891

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

Leadership & pay

31 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PAMELA REED SANCHEZ (PRESIDENT & CEO)
  • SHARON PETERSON (VICE PRESIDENT & CFO)

Highest reported compensation

  • PAMELA REED SANCHEZ (PRESIDENT & CEO): $172,233 total reported compensation
  • SHARON PETERSON (VICE PRESIDENT & CFO): $149,646 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Chartered as an educational institution by New York state in 1957, the society provides education and programming & conservation, fundraising, special events, public relations and marketing, and membership to monroe county's seneca park zoo. We also aid in the design and building of new exhibits and have, over the past 20 years, contributed more than $21 million to this effort.

What it reported doing in 2024

Education and programming conservation action- education 9,427 participants learned to act for wildlife and wild places through 515 education programs including onsite school programs, zoocamps, scouts and kinderzoo. We also had 121 teen volunteers logging over 5900 hours with 44,970 guest interactions. Programming & conservation action delivered 651 programs for 41,980 participants. The programs include urban ecology, the nature cart, community cleanups, the zoomobile and the butterfly beltway project.

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 85% 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

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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 41
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 61
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 41.6%; rating input score 42
  • Program expense ratio: 50.1%; rating input score 50
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.68 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.1%; rating input score 98; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 17%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.5; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.2%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4.2% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.4% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 41.6% of revenue deployed · 50.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 29 of 29 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $172K · 31 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 39 of 41 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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: Mission deployment rate scored 42/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 50/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 7/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 40/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 55/100.