Sierra Watershed Education Partnerships

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
911848359
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Tahoe City, CA, USA
Phone
5305831430
Rating
59
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Environmental Education and Outdoor Survival Programs

Reported finances

Revenue
$651,455
Expenses
$592,960
Assets
$524,835
Liabilities
$-27

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jill Sanford (President)
  • Debrah Arriola-Jacobson (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Melissa B Mohler (Executive Dir.): $104,487 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Sierra Watershed Education Partnerships (SWEP) promotes environmental stewardship by connecting students to their community and local environment through comprehensive watershed education and service learning projects.

What it reported doing in 2024

SWEP sponsors various fieldwork programs during the year with students eligible to participate in various programs based on their grade levels. The Wonders of Watershed fieldwork program for 4th grade students is a hands-on watershed education program that combines environmental science and community service.The Sagehen Field Station program for 5th grade students engages students in hands-on field study activities about the Sagehen forest, watershed and the plants and animals that exist in these environments.Environment Detectives is a field trip where 8th grade students learn skills used by environmental scientists to be detectives working as a group to solve the Mystery of the Dying Fish.The Tahoe Basin Watershed Education Summit allows high school students work along side scientific professionals to do hands-on field data collection.Various native fish education programs, field days and other events are sponsored for students of all grades.Forest Health and Defensible Space field programming has been expanding in Elementary, middle and high school, with some career pathway programming with older students.Winter Ecology programming involves getting the students outside to learn about snow science and winter survival skills in primarily elementary and middle school.Science Festival programming at the elementary level which revolves around experimentation and problem solving; particularly in the area of Environmental sciences.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 67% 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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and a relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 49
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 26
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 48.5%; rating input score 48
  • Program expense ratio: 52.3%; rating input score 52
  • Fundraising efficiency: $12.31 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 44; 44th 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • 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%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.89; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.6%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 15% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14.1% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 22.2% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 48.5% of revenue deployed · 52.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 12 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $310K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $104K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 48/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 52/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 44/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 59/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.