Southwestern Environmental Education Exchange

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
860682018
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Tucson, AZ, USA
Phone
5206701442
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Environmental Education and Outdoor Survival Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,724,376
Expenses
$1,707,076
Assets
$890,360
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • FRANCIS MORGAN (PRESIDENT)
  • SUSAN RANDOLPH (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • NEIL MARKOWITZ (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • NEIL MARKOWITZ (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $246,335 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The services, that the exchange provide, focus on education about the natural and built environment.

What it reported doing in 2024

Tucson water: tucson water continues to be e3's longest program partnership dating back to 1993. In 2024, the exchange conducted over 915 classroom presentations throughout the tucson metro area. Topics for classroom instruction include water, supply, water quality, water conservation, and climate change. In total the programs reached over 22,300 students with direct classroom presentations. The exchange also managed a water efficiency give-a-way program for tucson water, purchasing supplies and mailing over 2,000 individual water savings kits to tucson water customers.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 92% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 99%; rating input score 99
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.52; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.4%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.8% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 99% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $246K · 8 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • 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: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 24/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.