Henry's Fork Groundwater District

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
823805630
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2022
Location
St Anthony, ID, USA
Phone
2086243381
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Local Benevolent Life Insurance Associations

Reported finances

Revenue
$361,268
Expenses
$173,104
Assets
$330,909
Liabilities
$325

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • JEFF RAYBOULD (CHAIRMAN): $1,350 total reported compensation
  • CADE CRAPO (DIRECTOR): $450 total reported compensation
  • NICK RICKS (DIRECTOR): $450 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 henry's fork groundwater district (hfgwd) is responsible to negotiate our portion of the total mitigation requirement of groundwater users throughout the east snake river plain aquifer in Idaho. This mitigation comes at a cost to the groundwater users therefore hfgwd must assess to cover the cost of the mitigation plan. As part of our mitigation plan we are required to report our annual pumping to igwa and the id dept of water resources. This effort is completed for all groundwater users that are electors of our groundwater district including irrigators, municipalities and industrial water users.

What it reported doing in 2024

Ground water mitigation on behalf of members. 140 total members.

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 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 59
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 71
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 46.2%; rating input score 46
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 52.1%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.91; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.3%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -46.9% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 18.4% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.4% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 46.2% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 46/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 58/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 36/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 56/100.