Fort Wayne Zoological Society Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
356068234
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Fort Wayne, IN, USA
Phone
2604276800
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$18,153,771
Expenses
$18,065,551
Assets
$40,131,058
Liabilities
$4,322,820

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

Leadership & pay

31 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TOM ACKMANN (PRESIDENT)
  • SARAH EARLS (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • RICK SCHUITEMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR - ZOO)

Highest reported compensation

  • RICK SCHUITEMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR - ZOO): $251,094 total reported compensation
  • AMY LAZOFF (DIRECTOR OF PHILANTHROPY A): $152,852 total reported compensation
  • SARA MORALES (DIRECTOR OF FINANCE & ADMI): $132,805 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Connecting kids and animals, strengthening families, and inspiring people to care.

What it reported doing in 2024

Conservation & research: conservation & research the zoo is a conservation leader, providing financial support to 40 conservation partners around the globe in 2024. The kids for nature conservation kiosk continues to involve guests in conservation, allowing them to vote among three projects with their zoo provided penny at the entrance. Funds are generated through ticket sales and memberships, along with corks for conservation event proceeds, employee giving, guests donations and wild things gift shop "round up" program. The zoo participates in various research projects initiated by external and internal investigators that want to learn more about the animals that call our zoo home. One of our signature conservation programs is headstarting eastern hellbenders in partnership with purdue university, the department of natural resources, and several other midwest zoos. We currently have over 300 hellbenders that are being raised for future release into the wild. In collaboration with purdue university, we have completed our initial growth rate trends and unique spot pattern retention potential. The data will then be used as we investigate if size versus age has a more significant effect on survivability in the wild with their release over the next two years. As part of the one-year veterinary internship at the fort wayne zoo, post-graduate veterinarians are mentored and trained in zoo medicine and conservation research. The current intern, dr. Emma zhang, has initiated a research study that aims to determine reference ranges of several gastrointestinal tests in red pandas so that potential abnormal results can be better interpreted. This may assist in diagnosing gastrointestinal disease in this endangered species and guide future treatments. Serum samples are being utilized from red pandas across the u.s. And analyzed at Texas a&m university diagnostic lab, who is collaborating on this endeavor. Director of animal health and conservation, dr. Kami fox represented the fort wayne zoo by participating in the mariana avifauna conservation program (mac) in the south pacific. Heading up the veterinary and research components of this project, she and the team focused on an endangered bird, the saipan reed warbler, that only exists on the single island of saipan. With very little information known about this species, data was collected on behavior, husbandry, health, and disease during the trip. Over the next 5 years, the focus will be shifted to another endangered species, the rota white-eye, with an extensive recovery plan that involves future translocations to create insurance populations, in hopes of securing their long-term survival. The fort wayne zoo has been participating in the mac program for more than 10 years.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 67% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 74.2%; rating input score 74
  • Program expense ratio: 69.5%; rating input score 70
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.38 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.2%; rating input score 99; 32nd 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; 66th 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: 0.5%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.22; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.7%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.8% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 74.2% of revenue deployed · 69.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 24 of 24 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $12.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $251K · 31 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $3.2M reported
  • Consistency: 39 of 40 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 20 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 13 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.

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

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 35/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 45/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.