American Rivers

Legal name: American Rivers Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237305963
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
202-347-7550
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$53,419,167
Expenses
$41,444,247
Assets
$40,075,409
Liabilities
$7,728,682

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

Leadership & pay

36 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • THOMAS KIERNAN (PRESIDENT)
  • HEATHER TAYLOR-MIESLE (SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT)
  • PAULA WOLFERSEDER YABAR (SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, ADV)

Highest reported compensation

  • THOMAS KIERNAN (PRESIDENT): $440,478 total reported compensation
  • KRISTIN MAY (CFO (THRU 3/14/25)): $256,135 total reported compensation
  • PAULA WOLFERSEDER YABAR (SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, ADV): $246,152 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To protect wild rivers, restore damaged rivers, and conserve clean water for people and nature.

What it reported doing in 2024

Mobilize river and water movement: american rivers has always been known for our willingness and ability to work with everyone, from local partners to government agencies to decision-makers, to do what's best for rivers. We know that the challenges to rivers are increasing dramatically. We need a broad, powerful, non-partisan river movement to face these challenges and drive change that makes rivers healthier, water cleaner, and communities safer. We won't stop until every river has multitudes of champions speaking up for it.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 79% for direct work, and 21% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 63
  • Transparency & Controls: 89
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 60%; rating input score 60
  • Program expense ratio: 77%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.55 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.4%; rating input score 99; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 22.4%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.97; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.19; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.9%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.7% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 60% of revenue deployed · 77% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 25 of 25 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $31.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $440K · 36 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $10.7M reported
  • Consistency: 38 of 39 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 65 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 55 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 40/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.