The Environmental Quality Institute

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
271487941
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2018–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Black Mountain, NC, USA
Phone
8283577411
Rating
90
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Pollution Abatement and Control Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$150,742
Expenses
$130,537
Assets
$109,340
Liabilities
$1,546

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Ann Marie Traylor (Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • Ann Marie Traylor (Executive Director)
  • Doug Baughman (Chair / Treasurer)
  • Camila Filgueiras (Vice-Chair)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Scientific analyses to communicate environmental issues

What it reported doing in 2025

Since 1990, the Volunteer Water Information Network (VWIN) monitoring program has collected chemical data on streams and lakes in western North Carolina. This program provided monthly sampling and lab analysis of approximately 180 surface water sites in 2025.

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.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.8%; rating input score 79
  • Program expense ratio: 91%; rating input score 91

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 13.4%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.84; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 39.9%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78.8% of revenue deployed · 91% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $119K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2018 to 2025
  • 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.

  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 35/100.