Cimarron Watershed Alliance Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
201179179
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Cimarron, NM, USA
Phone
6623121678
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,820,264
Expenses
$4,282,441
Assets
$849,468
Liabilities
$55,169

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • REGINA BONNER (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • RICHARD SMITH (EXECUTIVE DI): $143,065 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To restore, maintain, and/or preserve surface and groundwater quality, aquatic resources, and water supplies. Serve as a resource on watershed issues and information. To protect, restore, and maintain natural resources (land, water, forest, and wildlife) in the watershed.

What it reported doing in 2025

The cwa was created as a result of a watershed study done by the New Mexico environment department, as required by the united states department of environmental protection. This study resulted in the adoption of several total maximum daily load (tmdl) reports that identified certain problems in creeks and rivers within the cimarron watershed. These problems included turbidity, temperature, aluminum, and fecal coliform. The cwa was formed to help address these problems at the local level with local input. A list of concerns and possible actions were identified by the cwa members. However, the cwa recognized that to be effective it must limit its efforts to a finite number of these issues at any one time. Therefore, the members' first step was to categorize their objectives into long-term and short-term solutions. These categories were then narrowed to what the members believed to be most critical for the future health of the watershed. These included: replanting riparian areas, reducing forest biomass, and improving wastewater management throughout the county.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 88% 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

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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86.3%; rating input score 86
  • Program expense ratio: 97.1%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 11.2%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.2; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.3%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 56% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 56.9% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 55.9% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 86.3% of revenue deployed · 97.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $143K · 10 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $3M reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 58/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.