Chicago Wilderness Trust

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
364479642
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
3128412733
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Children's, Youth Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$719,922
Expenses
$961,134
Assets
$431,409
Liabilities
$32,691

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Peter Layton (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Suzanne Malec-McKenna (Executive Dir.): $75,320 total reported compensation
  • Melinda Pruett-Jones (Assistant Secr): $23,202 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Chicago Wilderness leads strategy to preserve, improve, and expand nature and quality of life. An alliance of more than 200 member organizations, Chicago Wilderness focuses upon critical natural resources management and constituency building efforts in the region that spans Southeast Wisconsin, Northeast Illinois, Northwest Indiana, and Southwest Michigan. This critical region is home to 10+ million people and 500+ municipalities, includes 200+ miles of Lake Michigan Shoreline and more than 1 million acres of important lands and waters.

What it reported doing in 2014

A previous effort of Chicago Wilderness, Leave No Child Behind, formed to address the need to engage children in outdoor environments as a public health and learning initiative. Chicago Wilderness has refocused its communication efforts to engage constituents who are "Beyond the Choir". Building a long term constituency that reflects the current and forecasted diversity of the region - diversity in culture, generations, economics and geography - is imperative to ensure the Chicago Wilderness Region's lands and waters are preserved, improved, and expanded, resulting in a healthy and resilient region.

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 81% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 20
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 76.6%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $17.21 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 58; 58th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 73rd 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -33.5%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.45; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.3%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -13.3% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.3% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.6% per year; rating input score 0; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 76.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $736K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $75K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2010 to 2014
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 58/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 24/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 34/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 57/100.