The Oregon League of Conservation Voters Education Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
931177957
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Portland, OR, USA
Phone
5032244011
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$631,320
Expenses
$471,387
Assets
$146,955
Liabilities
$157,785

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • LINDSEY SCHOLTEN (EXECUTIVE DI): $145,629 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 Oregon league of conservation voters education fund works turn environmental values into state and local priorities by building political power for the environmental community. Olcv-ef, in collaboration with our partners, educates public, media, and elected officials about key environmental issues, works to increase voter participation in the electoral process, and mobilizes a diverse network of activists to advocate for sound environmental policies.

What it reported doing in 2024

Oregon conservation network and central Oregon conservation network: ocn is a coalition of about 40 conservation groups that share information and resources regarding state-level environmental decision-making. Cocn is a central Oregon-focused coalition of 12 conservation groups that share information and resources regarding state-level environmental decision- making.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 93% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 62.4%; rating input score 62
  • Program expense ratio: 83.5%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $18.01 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 56; 56th 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: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 25.3%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.31; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.07; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.3%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.8% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 62.4% of revenue deployed · 83.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $393K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $146K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 16 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 56/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 15/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 5/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.