Audubon Nature Institute

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
510157624
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
New Orleans, LA, US
Phone
(504) 861-2537
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$61,293,521
Expenses
$54,152,232
Assets
$21,999,453
Liabilities
$16,999,624

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

Leadership & pay

46 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • L Ronald Forman (President & CEO)
  • Daine Appleberry (Senior Vice President)
  • Richard D Toth Jr (Senior Vice President)
  • Stephen Davis (Senior Vice President Business Development)
  • Thomas Bagwill (Senior Vice President of Philanthropy)
  • Alicia Bunnell (Vice President of Marketin)

Highest reported compensation

  • L Ronald Forman (President & CEO): $2,088,856 total reported compensation
  • Kyle Burks (Exec VP/COO): $259,442 total reported compensation
  • Laurie Conkerton (Exec VP/CAO): $246,800 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Through conservation, education, and community engagement, we work to inspire a deeper connection to nature and ensure a thriving future for animals, ecosystems, and the people who share them.

What it reported doing in 2024

See Schedule O

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 93% 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.
  • 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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 60.1%; rating input score 60
  • Program expense ratio: 67.9%; rating input score 68
  • Fundraising efficiency: $18.4 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th 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: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th 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: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 11.7%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.41; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.77; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.9%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.4% per year; rating input score 100; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 8 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 60.1% of revenue deployed · 67.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 32 of 32 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $36.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $2.1M · 46 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $4.6M reported
  • Consistency: 40 of 40 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 11 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 12 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 56/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.