Bear Lake Watch

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
870531204
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2016, Form 990-N 2012
Location
Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Natural Resources Conservation and Protection

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$437,857
Expenses
$241,037
Assets
$1,242,261
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PHIL OLSEN (Vice President)
  • JODY BURNETT (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • BRADY LONG (Executive Dir.): $54,850 total reported compensation
  • MARK SCADDEN (Treasurer): $23,850 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To understand, protect and restore the environment and waters of Bear Lake and to assure that the interests of the public at large are represented and served in the allocation and utilization thereof.

What it reported doing in 2024

Represented the public's interest in bear lake by participating at all levels throughout the three state watershed.distributed relevant information to over 2000 members & interested parties; maintained website and other media outlets to inform and communicate with citizens about bear lake issues.worked to maintain the public and private partnerships supporting research and data collection on bear lake: including 7th year with deq-Utah, deq-Idaho and usgs water quality monitoring platforms on bear lake. Two additional research projects were completed with Utah state university including: improving our understanding of high-dimensional lake state transitions in bear lake Idaho-Utah through machine learning and enhancing bear lake's environmental data accessibility and preservation to support future research and sustainable management.held a fundraising golf tournament to support and fund the research initiatives.worked with the lake-front landholders, state lands and the co-op weed management for the eradication of invasive aquatic plants such as phragmites eurasian waterfilfoil in Utah & Idaho.

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 100% 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.

The verdict

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

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 76
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 64.6%; rating input score 65
  • Program expense ratio: 80.5%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.79 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 29; 29th 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 45%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.15; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 32.7%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 30.9% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.7% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.7% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 64.6% of revenue deployed · 80.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 13 board members independent · 0 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $194K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $55K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 7 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.