Fraternity of the Desert Bighorn
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 942950514
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2015–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2014
- Location
- Las Vegas, NV, USA
- Phone
- 7758308548
- Rating
- 67
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Wildlife Preservation, Protection
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $231,229
- Expenses
- $288,777
- Assets
- $3,028,552
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- PATRICK CUMMINGS (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- MATTHEW BLACKBURN (VICE PRESIDE)
- PATRICK CUMMINGS (PRESIDENT)
- MICHELLE MERCER (TREASURER)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
See schedule o
What it reported doing in 2025
The fraternity of the desert bighorn is a 100% volunteer non-profit organization based in las vegas, nv, with members "unselfishly dedicated to the welfare and conservation of desert bighorn and Nevada's wildlife." the organization was founded in 1964 by a handful of concerned advocates and conservationists when the desert bighorn sheep population in Nevada was at a historic low of less than 2,000 animals. The fraternity of the desert bighorn has worked over the last six decades in unison with ndow and other like-minded conservation groups to recover bighorn sheep populations in southern Nevada now nearing 10,000 animals. On saturday, may 17, 2025, the fraternity of the desert bighorn (fdb) held its 61st annual fundraiser banquet at the south point hotel and casino. In the first five months of 2025, fdb, in close cooperation with the Nevada department of wildlife (ndow), constructed three desert bighorn water developments (aka guzzlers) in rugged and remote terrain in three mountain ranges in southern Nevada. In january 2025, the first of the three guzzlers to be constructed in the 2025 build season was situated in the eastern portion of the muddy mountains, clark county. Due to the large population of desert bighorn sheep in this location, the water storage capacity of the project was boosted to an eight-tank system. The eight 2,300-gallon tanks equated to an overall storage capacity of 18,400 gallons. In february 2025, a new bighorn guzzler was constructed in the northeast portion of the spotted range, nye county. The spotted range is the westernmost mountain range on the desert national wildlife refuge. The third bighorn guzzler constructed in 2025 was in the northwest pahranagat range, lincoln county. Once charged by rain and snow producing storms, the large eight-tank project will reliably provide water to not only desert bighorn sheep but also other avian and terrestrial wildlife. As the lead organization on an ambitious water monitoring initiative, the fdb, in close cooperation with ndow and several nonprofit 501(c)(3) organizations, continues to install water level monitors and companion rain gauges at newly constructed and existing critically important bighorn guzzlers in southern Nevada. The autonomous water monitors collect water level and rainfall data. Data communications are satellite-mediated and are near real-time. The near real-time information on the status of guzzlers provides essential information relative to not only water availability but also maintenance issues. The water monitoring equipment was purchased from ranchbot monitoring solutions (fort worth, tx) and track tag llc (ely, nv). The water level and rainfall data are closely monitored by ndow personnel and fdb members. The fdb continues engagement in programs to educate children and adults about conservation measures focused on maintaining viable populations of desert bighorn sheep and other wildlife in southern Nevada. The fdb actively promoted desert bighorn conservation to kids and adults at the clark county fair, and sponsored five kids to attend the Nevada youth range camp held in the schell creek range near ely, white pine county. In addition, the fdb sponsored several important events: the 58th meeting of the desert bighorn council in gold canyon, az; sheep show (wild sheep foundation) at the reno-sparks convention center, chapter & affiliates summit (wild sheep foundation) in fort lauderdale, fl, and a meeting of the Nevada bighorn working group held at the reno-sparks convention center. Lastly, the fdb holds monthly members meetings to inform attendees of upcoming bighorn sheep conservation opportunities and challenges, and to foster relationships with the Nevada department of wildlife and the us fish and wildlife service.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 94% 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: 42
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 88
- Sustainability: 48
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 55.9%; rating input score 56
- Program expense ratio: 29.9%; rating input score 30
- Fundraising efficiency: $0.88 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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; 64th 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: -24.9%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 10.49; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -4.9% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 26.1% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 55.9% of revenue deployed · 29.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $86K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2015 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 56/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 30/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 5/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.