Blue River Watershed Group
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 201771307
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2022–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-N 2020
- Location
- Silverthorne, CO, USA
- Phone
- 7192099577
- Rating
- 74
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $563,228
- Expenses
- $453,299
- Assets
- $138,284
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
11 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JAMES PANSING (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- VANESSA LOGSDON (EXECUTIVE DI): $51,927 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 promote, protect and restore a healthy blue river, Colorado watershed through cooperative community education, stewardship, and resource management.
What it reported doing in 2024
The organization initiated the planning phase of the north fork of the swan native cutthroat trout preservation project and the blue river habitat restoration project guided by the integrated water management plan. We coordinated stakeholder efforts and began the cwcb's wildfire ready watersheds initiative, worked to grow and establish the summit county outdoor coalition, grew our annual river cleanup festival to 215 volunteers, and provided educational activities related to the continued improvement of the blue river watershed.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 82% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- 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 total spending goes to programs. 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: 61
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 74
- Sustainability: 54
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 52%; rating input score 52
- Program expense ratio: 64.7%; rating input score 65
- Fundraising efficiency: $464.83 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 19.5%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.31; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 11.5%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 43.2% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 66.1% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 52% of revenue deployed · 64.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $293K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $52K · 11 people listed
- Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2022 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 52/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 32/100.