Us for Belize Foundation for Research & Environmental Education Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
593340282
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Gainesville, FL, USA
Phone
3526810560
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Research Institutes and Public Policy Analysis

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,636,293
Expenses
$798,023
Assets
$948,866
Liabilities
$47,877

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JACOB MARLIN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • JAMIE ROTENBERG (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JACOB MARLIN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $98,700 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 mission of us for bfree is to conserve the biodiversity and cultural heritage of belize. As the only field station in the biologically important area of the maya mountains of belize, we seek to achieve our mission by successfully integrating scientific research, environmental education, and conservation initiatives, while also enhancing sustainable development, providing alternative livelihoods and ultimately improving the quality of life for belizeans and visitors from abroad.

What it reported doing in 2024

Field station operation: us for bfree operates a research and education facility on a 1,153 acre private reserve of tropical rainforest in the foothills of the maya mountains in southern belize. In 2024 this property was in acquisition by the non-governmental organization bfree in belize. Us for bfree provided funding for this acquisition process and is granted rights to operate the field station in perpetuity. Us for bfree employs four americans and 24 belizeans full time depending on the season and maintains buildings and equipment sufficient to host a maximum of 37 visiting students or researchers. An experimental cacao agroforestry farm is supported. Revenue and expenses related to infrastructure are included in this field station program whereas revenue and expenses related to hosting and conducting research are included in the research program.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 61% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

SUPPORTED - Most voting board members are independent and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 54
  • Transparency & Controls: 51
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 67
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 37.2%; rating input score 37
  • Program expense ratio: 76.2%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: $31.52 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • 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: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 51.2%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.19; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.4%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.1% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.8% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.8% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 37.2% of revenue deployed · 76.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $608K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $99K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 37/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 48/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 29/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 52/100.