Heart of the Rockies Initiative

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
463635624
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Missoula, MT, USA
Phone
4066402816
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Natural Resources Conservation and Protection

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,789,638
Expenses
$1,387,194
Assets
$888,736
Liabilities
$75,809

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KRISTIN TROY (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOANN GRANT (MANAGING DIR.): $138,390 total reported compensation
  • KALI HANNON (MANAGING DIR.): $133,166 total reported compensation
  • GAVIN RICKLEFS (MANAGING DIR.): $35,862 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The Heart of the Rockies Initiative is a partnership of 29 local, regional, and national land trusts in the Central Rockies of North America. Our mission is to ensure connected habitat and working lands for people and wildlife by increasing the pace of durable conservation. We work from common ground to find lasting, locally-driven solutions to the social and ecological challenges across the region. Together, we help land trusts, landowners, and communities share ideas, connections, and technologies across boundaries. We believe that conservation is rooted in local actions and needs. We bring a community-based approach, founded upon concern and respect for all people and communities of our region.

What it reported doing in 2024

As a land trust partnership, our primary program supports the work of our land trust members. In 2024, we operated a program to accelerate the pace of conservation of the most important private lands for wildlife connectivity. We helped increase the profile of local, private land conservations role in supporting communities, economies, natural systems, and wildlife populations at a large scale. We delivered the latest science to on-the-ground private land conservation practitioners on large landscape issues like connectivity, climate resilience, and productive agriculturallands at scales needed for local decisions.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 82% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 84% 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

STRONG - 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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 89
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 62.4%; rating input score 62
  • Program expense ratio: 79.8%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $19.25 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 87.5%; rating input score 87; 37th 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: 22.5%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.64; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 22.2%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.8% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.7% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.9% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 62.4% of revenue deployed · 79.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $138K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 31 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 57/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 29/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 45/100.