Terraclear Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
853275435
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2022
Location
Lancaster, PA, USA
Phone
7175001237
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Centers to Support the Independence of Specific Populations

Reported finances

Revenue
$914,361
Expenses
$155,130
Assets
$1,297,289
Liabilities
$18,816

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DANIEL RICE (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • DAWN LEWIS (EXECUTIVE DI): $53,459 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 foundation is dedicated to ensuring access to clean water, safeguarding child rights, and protecting the environment. Its purpose is to promote charitable, social, and development-oriented activities, particularly in southeast asia.

What it reported doing in 2024

Terrakids - a program that hosts educational programs with subjects like children's rights, safe drinking water, sanitation and hygiene. Terrakids partners with district education ministries in laos to identify at-risk and needy schools. Once a school has been identified by the department, our staff surveys the school and makes a plan with the school to place water filters in classrooms and hold a day of educational programs for students and teachers. In 2024, terraclear production in laos provided 312 filters to classrooms benefiting more than 7,140 students and 282 teachers. Terraclear foundation directly supported the distribution of 300 filters related to the terrakids program along with 2 focused teacher training events.

Operating model

Revenue model
Affiliate-supported. 86% of the money available for current operations came from contributions from related organizations.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 82% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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 the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 36
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 81
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 14.7%; rating input score 15
  • Program expense ratio: 63%; rating input score 63
  • Fundraising efficiency: $24.22 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 63; 63rd 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: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 83%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 8.36; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 34.5%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 54.4% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 52.4% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 83.3% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 14.7% of revenue deployed · 63% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $98K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $53K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 15/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.