Thrive Conservation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
851037276
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2022
Location
Sacramento, CA, USA
Phone
8056174442
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Natural Resources Conservation and Protection

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$84,898
Expenses
$164,611
Assets
$95,564
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARK VAN NYDECK ERDMANN (DIRECTOR AND PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • SARAH ANN LEWIS (DIRECTOR AND SECRETARY): $23,950 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Nature conservation, including marine conservation and developing early career conservationists

What it reported doing in 2025

Thrive Conservation provided funding and technical support for the ReShark StAR Project in Indonesia, which successfully reintroduced endangered leopard sharks into the wild in Raja Ampat. Activities implemented by Indonesian partners included hatchery management, tagging, and community engagement to ensure long-term species recovery. Thrive Conservation also led program media and communications to share the initiative globally as a model for species restoration. The program also provided internship and professional development opportunities for emerging Indonesian conservationists through hands-on fieldwork and training.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 50% for direct work, and 50% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 24
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 83.8%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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; 81st 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -93.9%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.58; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.5%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 57.8% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.9% per year; rating input score 0; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 21.4% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 83.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $138K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $24K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 19/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.