Center for Wildlife Studies

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
834505201
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2020, Form 990-N 2019
Location
Camden, ME, USA
Phone
2076135522
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Wildlife Preservation, Protection

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$596,060
Expenses
$676,417
Assets
$80,320
Liabilities
$126,595

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TRISTAN BURGESS (VICE PRESIDENT, SECRETARY)
  • JOHN HOPKINS (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • TRISTAN BURGESS (VICE PRESIDENT, SECRETARY): $108,622 total reported compensation
  • JOHN HOPKINS (PRESIDENT): $96,500 total reported compensation
  • CHERYL FREDERICK (DIRECTOR): $5,850 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 provide accessible environmental education and promote wildlife conservation through science.

What it reported doing in 2024

Education - cws education trained hundreds of researchers, resource management professionals, conservation specialists, environmental educators, and graduate and undergraduate students through a variety of course formats-including online, in-person, and hybrid offerings. Topics covered included applied quantitative ecology, geographic information science, conservation planning, research and management methods, and ecology. In addition, we successfully completed the first year of our professional certificate program in applied quantitative ecology.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 75% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 44
  • Sustainability: 9
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89%; rating input score 89
  • Program expense ratio: 78.5%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: $95.78 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 86; 86th 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: 40%; rating input score 40; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -13.5%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.12; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.58; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 31.2%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.5% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 29.1% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 27.5% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 89% of revenue deployed · 78.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $531K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $109K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 40/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.