Harris Ranch Wildlife Mitigation As

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
274403659
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-N 2016
Location
Boise, ID, USA
Phone
2083431510
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Natural Resources Conservation and Protection

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$209,655
Expenses
$218,063
Assets
$441,150
Liabilities
$101,411

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • W DAVID EBERLE (PRESIDENT)
  • MIKE PELLANT (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • KARIE PAPPANI (CONSERVATION DIRECTOR)
  • KARI GEBHARDT (DIRECTOR)
  • ERIC WILSON (DIRECTOR)

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

Mitigate adverse impacts to wildlife by implementing the harris ranch wildlife impact assessment and management plan. Actions involve on the ground conservation work and monitoring of habitat and education of local residents about wildlife and natural environment.

What it reported doing in 2025

Wildlife habitat conservation and restoration projects in the barber valley including native plantings, fence removal, weed management, establishment and maintenance of project sites, kestrel nest box program, education and outreach activities including tours and education tables with local school and organizations, neighborhoods, and the public, distribution of education guides, newsletters, email announcements and information

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 92% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.7%; rating input score 95
  • Program expense ratio: 90.6%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: -4%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.02; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.23; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 48.4% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.7% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.7% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 94.7% of revenue deployed · 90.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $198K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 27/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 15/100.