Arizonans for Wildlife

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
822645264
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017
Location
Phoenix, AZ, USA
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$731,253
Expenses
$219,983
Assets
$511,270
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

People named in this filing

  • CHERYL NAUMANN (TREASURER)
  • KELLYE PINKLETON (CHAIRMAN)
  • KAREN MICHAEL (OFFICER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Az for wildlife is seeking to put a measure on the november 2018 ballot that would prohibit the trophy hunting, including by cruel hunting and trapping, of mountain lion, bobcats, jaguars, ocelots, and lynx

What it reported doing in 2017

Raised awareness for need to protect arizonas wildlife

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 62% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 87
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 29.3%; rating input score 29
  • Program expense ratio: 97.3%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: $122.36 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: No; rating input score 0
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 69.9%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.32; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 29.3% of revenue deployed · 97.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $214K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 29/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Major donor itemization scored 0/100.