Anne K Taylor Fund

What it reported doing in 2024

In 1999, aktf's very first projects were anti-poaching patrols and wildlife rescues before the mara conservancy took over management of the mara triangle. The primary responsibilities of the aktf and mara conservancy rangers currently involved in the project include patrolling key poaching hotspots around the reserve, removing snares set by poachers, and helping the kenya wildlife service/david sheldrick wildlife trust veterinarians to rescue animals with human-induced injuries. The team also collaborates with national geographic big cats initiative, eden wildlife trust, mara north conservancy, mara conservancy, oloisukut conservancy, mara elephant project, wwf, kenya forestry service - as well as many local community members - to fulfill its mission. Our work to save kenya's wildlife for future generations could not be possible without the help of these organizations, and we are extremely grateful for their collaboration.elias kamande leads, manages, and transports the anti-poaching team. The other permanent members of the aktf anti-poaching team are ole kilonga, ole saitoti, ole sirere, and oloito kinanda, all of whom are local maasai community members. We are grateful to mara conservancy wardens francis pengo, daniel tunai, dominic naikuta, julius tierewa, konchela, and bet, rangers anthony kangethe, nayioma, kennedy kitmai, ochieng, julius seme, topisia kirelai, and koyiaki as well as mara conservancy (mc) director brian heath, for their support this year on this project along with the mc rangers who accompany our team.in our area of work, the bush meat trade largely drives poaching activity although trophies like ivory and rhino horns also play a role. Though many poachers actually come from neighboring communities, their presence in the mara is only possible with permission from the maasai. To combat this side of poaching, our team regularly arrests poachers caught in the act and communicates with locals about the destructive effects of wildlife population declines on the economy of masai mara.poachers' weapons of choice to catch animals for bushmeat are metal nooses, called snares, attached to trees near wildlife trails. These snares tighten as the animal walks through and keeps them there until the poachers can come to kill them. Usually, poachers set more snares than necessary in order to ensure a bountiful hunt. As a result, even animals that are not killed and harvested are left to die in the wires. The patrol team removes the snares and releases the animals that are caught in them whenever possible. In the event that animals are wounded by the snares, we call in the david sheldrick wildlife trust/kws veterinarians to help treat the injuries. The patrol team removed approximately 140 snares in 2019 and rescued 4 live animals. Since 2009, we have removed 7,140 snares from the mara (in addition to the several thousand more we removed before we began counting)-representing many thousands of animals saved from death.

Financial Efficiency

• Mission deployment rate: 67.9%; rating input score 68
• Program expense ratio: 98.5%; rating input score 98
• Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
• Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
  • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
  • Whistleblower policy: Fail
  • Document-retention policy: Fail
  • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
  • 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: 31.2%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
• Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.33; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
• Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
• Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

• Program expense growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
• Revenue growth: 6.6% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
• Asset growth: 6.6% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings