The Calflora Database

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
311689940
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Berkeley, CA, USA
Phone
5108833148
Rating
50
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Botanical Gardens, Arboreta and Botanical Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$620,610
Expenses
$480,997
Assets
$377,681
Liabilities
$16,634

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Ron Vanderhoff (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Cynthia Powell (Director): $151,161 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 Calflora Database is a nonprofit organization dedicated to providing information about California plant biodiversity for use in Education, Research and Conservation. Calflora is structured as a digital library to fulfill the following objectives: To serve as a repository for information on California wild plants in electronic formats from diverse sources, including public agencies, academic institutions, private organizations, and individuals. To provide this information in readily usable, electronic formats for scientific, conservation, and educational purposes. To serve public information needs related to scientific study, land management, environmental analysis, education, and appreciation of California plant life. To coordinate and integrate efforts towards these objectives undertaken by scientists, public agencies, private organizations, and members of the public.

What it reported doing in 2024

Provide tabular and graphical range information about Calflora's wild native and weedy plants via www.calflora.org web site to public agencies, scientists, students, and the general public.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 69% 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

MIXED - Program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 46
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 38
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 40.1%; rating input score 40
  • Program expense ratio: 51.7%; rating input score 52
  • Fundraising efficiency: $22.22 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 55.6%; rating input score 56; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 22.5%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.79; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 31.4%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.3% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.9% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 40.1% of revenue deployed · 51.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 9 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $249K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $151K · 9 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 40/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 52/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 56/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 54/100.