The Bering Sea Crab Cooperative

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
203468991
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2022
Location
Carson, WA, USA
Phone
5037994414
Rating
48
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Agricultural Programs

Reported finances

Revenue
$71,318
Expenses
$52,813
Assets
$782,586
Liabilities
$690,230

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Timothy Heuker (Vice President)
  • Scott Campbell Jr (President)

People named in this filing

  • Timothy Heuker (Vice President)
  • Scott Campbell Jr (President)
  • Gary Painter (Secretary/Treas)

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

The Bering Sea Crab Cooperative has been formed to generally exercise the powers of an Alaska Cooperation corporation conducive to its purposes, subject to limitations imposed by the provisions of the Alaska Cooperative Corporation Act and the Cooperative's Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Bering Sea Crab Cooperative (TBSCC) requires members to report their catch on a contemporaneous basis. TBSCC monitors the members' catch to determine that the catch complies with the Cooperative IFQ permit. TBSCC assists members with complying with their individual IFQ compliance issues.This benefits the members by having TBSCC process the paperwork for compliance. The NMFS also benefits because TBSCC monitors compliance which reduces the NMFS's paperwork and compliance efforts.TBSCC monitors transfers of quota shares among members. This benefits members and the NMFS in that TBSCC is able to provide current membership and IFQ ownership data.TBSCC computes and distributes funds to members, so that each member receives the same amount per pound.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - 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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 65
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: 25.9%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 14.82; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.88; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -14% per year; rating input score 0; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 10 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.