Badlands National Park Conservancy

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
830728866
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2020
Location
Rapid City, SD, USA
Phone
6514923534
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$149,803
Expenses
$277,109
Assets
$206,747
Liabilities
$2,060

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KRISTEN CONZET (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • KRISTEN CONZET (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $76,635 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The conservancy, in partnership with the national park service, is dedicated to enriching and preserving forever the wonders and significance of the parks of the badlands of South Dakota.

What it reported doing in 2024

Badlands national park conservancy (bnpc) engages public support for education about the badlands national park, enhances public use and enjoyment of the park, and protects the park's natural resources, beauty, wildlife, and environment. During 2024, bnpc furthered its mission through the following projects:1. South unit driving guide 2. Continued funding for the preparation and preservation of fossils unearthed in the park, of paleontological significance 3. Continued support for dark sky certification, and the astronomy festival 4. Continued support for the design and construction of the new visitor center 5. Sponsorship of sioux falls levitt event 6. Sponsorship of hollow coves band 7. Awarded npf storytelling grant 8. Support and funding for the uas (unmanned aerial system-drone) in memory of randy seiler

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 42% for direct work, and 58% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

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

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 18
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 62.7%; rating input score 63
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.15 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

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: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: -85%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.75; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 27.7%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 120.3% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -11.7% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -18.6% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 62.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $174K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $77K · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 45/100.