Students for Eco-Education and Agriculture Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 371639971
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2013–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Ventura, CA, USA
- Phone
- 8058928155
- Rating
- 60
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Youth Development - Agricultural
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $806,196
- Expenses
- $912,240
- Assets
- $32,488
- Liabilities
- $73,851
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
9 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Brett Burkey (President)
People named in this filing
- Brett Burkey (President)
- Steve Gill (Treasurer)
- Melinda Beardsley (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. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
SEEAGs vision is to inspire our local communities to have a deep appreciation for agriculture and the hands and lands that feed us to ensure the future viability of agriculture in rural and urban communities.SEEAG educates over 10,000 students and community members annually about the importance of local agriculture in schools, during field trips and at special events like Ventura County and Santa Barbara County Farm Days.
What it reported doing in 2024
The STEM Careers Pathways in Agriculture program immerses high school students in the diverse world of agriculture, offering them hands-on experience in agronomy, technology, and engineering through classroom labs and real-world exposure during field trips. Students explore career opportunities, align their strengths with industry roles, and gain insights into relevant degrees and certifications. By the program's end, they will have discovered a variety of career options, connected with industry professionals, and learned about educational pathways, leaving the program ready to pursue their future in agriculture.500 Unduplicated High School Students
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 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.
- 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: 40
- Transparency & Controls: 77
- Accountability: 76
- Sustainability: 17
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 46.2%; rating input score 46
- Program expense ratio: 40.9%; rating input score 41
- Fundraising efficiency: $1.68 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- 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: -13.2%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.04; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 2.27; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 4.1% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 10.1% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 46.2% of revenue deployed · 40.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $373K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
- Consistency: 32 of 34 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2013 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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 46/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 41/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 5/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule G fundraiser detail did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 2/100.