Yuba Environmental Science Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
994194496
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Dobbins, CA, USA
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,715
Expenses
$2,828
Assets
$3,783

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Lisa Thompson (Chairperson)
  • Louise Miller (Vice Chairperson)
  • Tessa Campbell (Treasurer)

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

The primary purpose of the Foundation is to support and enhance the educational programs, facilities, and initiatives at YES Charter Academy, and to back Yuba County and regional community initiatives for regenerative farming, forestry, farm-to-fork, and like purposes.

What it reported doing in 2025

CSA Project involved procurement of fresh vegetables from farmers and distribution to community members. The program supported sustainable agriculture, fair farmer income, and provided affordable fresh produce to participating hou

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 79% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filed totals do not add up and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 100
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 27
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -64.9%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.34; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 132.4% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -101.6% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -78.5% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $22K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 7 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Part III program expenses within total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.