Wetlands Watch Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
542005763
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2014
Location
Norfolk, VA, USA
Phone
7576234835
Rating
89
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Research Institutes and/or Public Policy Analysis

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$830,600
Expenses
$866,684
Assets
$620,381
Liabilities
$234,093

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

People named in this filing

  • STEVEN EMMANUEL (DIRECTOR)
  • ALEXANDER FELLA (DIRECTOR)
  • RICHARD HILDRETH (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. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to enhance natural resilience, bolster community adaptation efforts, and protect and restore wetlands throughout Virginia. We advance climate adaptation by working collaboratively with a wide variety of stakeholders, and by implementing solution-focused strategies that unify and connect.

What it reported doing in 2024

Research, education, and outreach to the public, government, academic institutions, ngos, and other stakeholders on floodplain management, emergency management, flood risk reduction, flood insurance, fema programs, funding opportunities, and adaptive land use strategies to reduce the impacts of climate change to people, properties, public infrastructure, and natural infrastructure. Work with universities, neighborhood associations, and localities to develop designs and strategies to reduce risk and build resilience. Lead a community science data collection event during high tides to map flooding and validate future flooding models. Educate students on the impacts of climate change and the importance of protecting our natural resources from increasing risks. (800 email contacts, 250 volunteers, 200 face to face contacts, 100 government agency contacts, 250 volunteers)

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 87% 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 92
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 95.5%; rating input score 95
  • Program expense ratio: 91.4%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: $43.92 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 76; 76th 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: 99.1%; rating input score 99; 48th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -4.3%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.72; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.38; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16.5% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.1% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.7% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 95.5% of revenue deployed · 91.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $792K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • 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.
  • 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 25/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 32/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.