Shark Team One Corp

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
812985728
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2021, Form 990-N 2018
Location
Fort Lauderdale, FL, USA
Phone
9547890762
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Wildlife Preservation, Protection

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$225,140
Expenses
$202,781
Assets
$398,454
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Angela Smith (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Philip DuBois (Director): $28,460 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To protect sharks, worldwide endangered species and ocean ecosystems through outreach, scientific research and education. Shark Team One works to promote environmental conservation through its core programs, public awareness campaigns and marine protected area projects. Shark Team One ecology, research and citizen science expeditions focusing on endangered species also help educate students, familes and the public while helping to protect community livelihoods.

What it reported doing in 2025

Endangered Whale Shark Conservation - specific threats we are addressing are ship strikes, injury from marine plastic pollution, fishing gear entanglement, inadequate marine reserves and overfishing. 1,603,570 people reached by conservation messaging, increased number of people taking action by 15,550. In this program we inspire families and children to become citizen scientists to help protect endangered species and create the future of conservation. We are also providing scientific study that has created increased protection for endangered whale sharks. Number of people engaged by community outreach programming is 385,000. Our "Heads Up Fins Up" Initiative seeks to curb impacts to whale sharks that are becoming severely injured or killed by ship strikes. This initiative is bridging the gap for enforcement in marine protected areas and asks corporate shipping and consumer goods companies to create less impact and follow established governmental and our conservation guidelines for reporting whale shark sightings, following zoning regulations and reducing speed through mapped whale shark aggregation areas. Our ichthyoplankton studies are first of their kind to involve local ecotourism operators and artisanal fishers in Mexico. Through our research, multiple government agencies have agreed to create marine protective corridors to protect the endangered sharks.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 61% 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 most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86.8%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 96.4%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: $44.31 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 72; 72nd 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: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 9.9%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.96; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 21.9% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 22.9% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 86.8% of revenue deployed · 96.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $195K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $28K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 39 of 39 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 to 2025
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 56/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.