Arizona Elk Society

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
861035639
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-T 2025
Location
Peoria, AZ, USA
Phone
6234444147
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,485,167
Expenses
$2,355,283
Assets
$2,912,986
Liabilities
$361,311

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Steve Clark (Executive Director/Chairman)
  • Vashti Tice Supplee (President)
  • Steve Schaefer (Vice President)
  • Rich Williams (Past President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Steve Clark (Executive Director/Chairman): $145,950 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Wildlife conservation organization benefiting elk and other wildlife for habitat conservation and restoration and to preserve our hunting heritage. Activities include promoting sound wildlife management and habitat youth conservation programs hunting and outdoor activities hunting programs for veterans and educating the public.

What it reported doing in 2025

Volunteers and contractors work with the US Forest Serv., Az Game and Fish, State of AZ, SRP and more on collaborative projects to restore, maintain and enhance wildlife habitat. Programs also incorporate Boy Scout Projects. AES volunteers hauled over 400,000 gal. of water for wildlife, restored and maintained over 45 water catchments. Volunteers work on riparian restoration, creek channel rebuilding, fence removal, cleared jack pines and junipers for grassland restoration, hauled and placed tons of rock to build riparian stream structures to restore meadow and watershed, maintained riparian cattle enclosure fencing, built log fences to protect critical wildlife habitat and water sources, restored water catchments and troughs, and thinned brush around water catchments and in important wildlife migration corridors. AES had over 250 volunteers providing thousands of hours working on wildlife restoration projects. AES contractors masticate and clear thousands of acres of invasive junipers to restore historic grassland for wldlife and to increase watershed and help stop forest fires.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 61% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 85
  • Sustainability: 62
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 58.3%; rating input score 58
  • Program expense ratio: 86.3%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.82 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 92.1%; rating input score 92; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 32.4%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.24; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.2%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.7% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.4% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 58.3% of revenue deployed · 86.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 13 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $146K · 13 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $986K reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 34 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 58/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 41/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 41/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 44/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 49/100.