Conservation Minnesota Voter Center Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
411949625
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Minneapolis, MN, USA
Phone
6127672444
Rating
94
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,519,842
Expenses
$1,917,280
Assets
$648,311
Liabilities
$38,904

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GIA VITALI (PRESIDENT)
  • PAUL AUSTIN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • PAUL AUSTIN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $186,246 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Conservation Minnesota voter center researches public opinion and government actions on conservation issues, providing reliable information to help minnesotans make decisions that protect the health of our air, water, communities and families.

What it reported doing in 2024

Cultivating leaders: there are many ways that cmvc works to increase the number of state leaders working to protect our lakes, lands, and way of life. It rewards conservation champions by publicly recognizing their leadership. Cmvc also works behind the scenes to recruit strong candidates to seek appointed and elected offices that impact the great outdoors. During elections, it provides voters with unbiased and positively presented information about the conservation records of candidates.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 97
  • Transparency & Controls: 96
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 20
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 91.9%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: $273.74 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -26.1%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.34; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.6%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 17.5% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14.3% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.3% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 91.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $186K · 7 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 9 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 9 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 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 50/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 54/100.