Chintimini Wildlife Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
943085445
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2013
Location
Corvallis, OR, USA
Phone
5417455324
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Wildlife Sanctuary, Refuge

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$760,807
Expenses
$685,024
Assets
$875,544
Liabilities
$301,874

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LESLIE WITT (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHUCK TOURTILLOT (EXECUTIVE DI): $74,925 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Chintimini wildlife center provides care for injured and orphaned wildlife with the goal of returning them to their natural habitat, and fosters a connection between people and wildlife through education.

What it reported doing in 2024

Wildlife rehabilitation program: since 1989, chintimini has taken in and provided care to injured, sick, and orphaned wildlife in corvallis and the surrounding area. The primary goal for all patients is successful rehabilitation and re-release back into natural habitat. The wildlife rehabilitation clinic is open 365 days per year and serves more than 2,000 patients annually. It receives thousands of calls on its wildlife emergency hotline and provides consultation and education to help the public humanely resolve wildlife conflicts. Since founding, the program has admitted more than 30,000 native birds, mammals, and reptiles.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 88% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 47
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 46.6%; rating input score 47
  • Program expense ratio: 49.8%; rating input score 50
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.85 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 34; 34th 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: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 10%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.28; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.34; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.9%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.6% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.5% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 46.6% of revenue deployed · 49.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 9 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $341K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $75K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 47/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 50/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 34/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 34/100.