Alliance for the Wild Rockies Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
810455740
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2018
Location
Helena, MT, USA
Phone
4064595936
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Natural Resources Conservation and Protection

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$364,633
Expenses
$415,529
Assets
$63,106
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PAUL EDWARDS (PRESIDENT)
  • GARY MCFARLANE (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MICHAEL GARRITY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/TREASUR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MICHAEL GARRITY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/TREASUR): $105,808 total reported compensation

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 secure the ecological integrity of the wild rockies bioregion through citizen empowerment and the application of conservation biology, sustainable economic models and environmental law.

What it reported doing in 2024

Ecosystem defense. Our mission is to secure the ecological integrity of the wild rockies bioregion through citizen empowerment and the application of conservation biology, sustainable economic models and environmental law. Our public lands belong to all of us, and it is our duty to protect the immeasurable value of old-growth forests, snow-capped mountains, and freshwater rivers and lakes for many generations to come. To fulfill this mission we comment and submit comments mostly on projects on federal lands throughout the northern rockies and a few projects on state lands in Montana. If the government ignores our comments, we often hire attorneys to file lawsuits against the united states forest service, the fish and wildlife service, and the bureau of land management. We also wrote a bill before congress, the northern rockies ecosystem protection act, h.r. 2420 in the house and s. 1198 in the senate.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 85% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 98
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 65
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 96.9%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: $261.39 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 75%; rating input score 75; 20th 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: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -14%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.15; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 25.5%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 18.8% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.3% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 96.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 4 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $403K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $106K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 18/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.