Buffalo Nations Grasslands Alliance
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 863303913
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2022–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2021
- Location
- Lower Brule, SD, USA
- Phone
- 6057303208
- Rating
- 83
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Natural Resources Conservation and Protection
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,338,397
- Expenses
- $1,548,982
- Assets
- $1,644,869
- Liabilities
- $40,542
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Marvin Grassrope (Board President)
- Rachel Hanisch (Board Vice President)
- Shaun Grassel (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- Shaun Grassel (CEO): $129,283 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Buffalo Nations Grasslands Alliance's mission is to ensure that the Native nations in the US portion of the Northern Great Plains have the technical and financial resources to plan and act on the vision for their traditional lands and waters, which includes ensuring that: Grasslands and native wildlife are restored or enhanced. Tribal members thrive by sustainable stewarding and connect with natural resources & Fish and Game departments have the capacity to deliver conservation impacts at scale.
What it reported doing in 2025
The Buffalo Nations Grasslands Alliance's mission is to ensure that the Native nations in the US portion of Northern Great Plans have the technical and financial resources to plan and act on the vision for their traditional lands and waters, which includes ensuring that: Grasslands and native wildlife are restored or enhanced. Tribal members thrive by sustainable stewarding and connective with natural resources & Fish and game departments have the capacity to deliver conservation impacts at scale.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 49% for direct work, and 51% for grants.
The verdict
STRONG - 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 93
- Transparency & Controls: 86
- Accountability: 69
- Sustainability: 28
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 98.7%; rating input score 99
- Program expense ratio: 85.3%; rating input score 85
- Fundraising efficiency: $119.76 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 1st 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; 64th 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: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -15.7%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.06; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 8.3%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 106.6% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 41.1% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 45.2% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 98.7% of revenue deployed · 85.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.3M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $129K · 6 people listed
- Consistency: 27 of 29 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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: 6 of 8 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D land buildings reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D other liabilities reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 42/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 51/100.