Green River Valley Land Trust

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
830332208
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015
Location
Pinedale, WY, USA
Phone
3072310942
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Land Resources Conservation

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$497,405
Expenses
$132,633
Assets
$714,186
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRIAN GRAY (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • JIM ROSCOE (DIRECTOR)
  • AARON OTTEMAN (DIRECTOR)
  • BRIAN GRAY (PRESIDENT)

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 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The grvlt works with private landowners to conserve sublette county's natural & agricultural resources, protection of open spaces, watersheds & wildlife habitat. Support comes primarily from individual donors.

What it reported doing in 2015

The grvlt (green river valley land trust) works to assist land owning families of sublette county Wyoming in the conservation of agricultural, ranch and natural lands. The grvlt's conservation projects also contribute to the protection of open spaces, watersheds, wildlife habitat and other ecological values for the benefit of today's inhabitants and as a legacy for future generations. Sublette county is home to historic working ranch operations and thriving native wildlife populations. The work of the grvlt centers upon generating conservation strategies utilizing conservation easements. Land conserved includes productive hay meadows, rangelands, riparian habitat and crucial winter range for native ungulates.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 85% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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 revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 44
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 89
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 19.3%; rating input score 19
  • Program expense ratio: 72.5%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: $78.9 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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; 63rd 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: 73.3%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.38; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 76.5% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -32.5% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 27.6% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 19.3% of revenue deployed · 72.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $96K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2011 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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: Mission deployment rate scored 19/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.