Friends of the Verde River

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
452927355
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Cottonwood, AZ, USA
Phone
9286416013
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Foundations

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,739,655
Expenses
$1,957,727
Assets
$916,682
Liabilities
$251,924

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JEANNE SWARTHOUT (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • DAVID GRESSLY (EXECUTIVE DI): $104,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To work collaboratively for a healthy flowing verde river system.

What it reported doing in 2024

Environment, conservation, and wildlife habitat restoration. Friends of the verde river and its verde watershed restoration coalition partners achieved significant restoration milestones in fy25, including the removal of invasive plants along nearly 17 miles of fossil creek, a federally designated wild and scenic river. Fvr funded crews from Arizona conservation corps, verde earth technologies, and wild az also removed giant reed, tamarisk, and other invasive species throughout the verde river greenway and wild and scenic sections of the lower verde. In upland areas, friends implemented low-tech process-based restoration projects in stringtown wash and pine creek to slow water flow, improve groundwater recharge, and restore natural channel processes. These efforts strengthened habitat, reduced wildfire risk, and enhanced ecological resilience throughout the watershed. Friends of the verde river also received two Arizona forward awards for its restoration work at fossil creek.this program had expenses of 356,983 and grants paid to individuals of 11,000 during the fiscal year.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 72% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 93% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 92%; rating input score 92
  • Program expense ratio: 81.8%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $48.64 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 19.2%; rating input score 19; 26th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -12.5%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.47; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.27; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.3%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.7% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 92% of revenue deployed · 81.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $104K · 10 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $269K reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 19/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 22/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 52/100.