Fish & Wildlife Foundation of Florida

Legal name: Fish & Wildlife Foundation of Florida I

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
593277808
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Tallahassee, FL, USA
Phone
800-435-7352
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$25,766,143
Expenses
$17,792,610
Assets
$106,408,355
Liabilities
$728,539

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

Leadership & pay

28 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANDREW WALKER (PRESIDENT/CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANDREW WALKER (PRESIDENT/CEO): $251,026 total reported compensation
  • JAMES W BRADFORD (COO): $234,787 total reported compensation
  • MICHELLE ASHTON (DIRECTOR OF COMMUNICATIONS & EVENTS): $193,688 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The Fish & Wildlife Foundation of Florida is a nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization that seeks to protect our outstanding animals and plants and the lands and waters they need to survive.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Florida fish and wildlife conservation commission (fwc) division ofhunting and game management's hunter safety and public shooting rangesection has such powers, duties, responsibilities, and functions as arenecessary to provide hunter safety training and certification whichnecessitates the development and management of public shooting rangesincluding the one at tenoroc fish management area, triple n wildlife management area, palm beach county and in bay county. The fish & wildlife foundation of Florida manages the funds for those ranges.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 68% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 68% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 97
  • Sustainability: 83
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 53.2%; rating input score 53
  • Program expense ratio: 90.6%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: $158.62 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 13.5%; rating input score 14; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 95.5%; rating input score 95; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 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: 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: 30.9%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.98; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.5%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.9% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14.5% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.1% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 13 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 53.2% of revenue deployed · 90.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 21 of 22 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $16.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $251K · 28 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 36 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 64 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 58 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.
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 53/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 39/100.