International Rivers Network

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
943158295
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Oakland, CA, USA
Phone
5108481155
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,151,504
Expenses
$1,991,006
Assets
$1,928,930
Liabilities
$90,607

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Isabella Winkler (Co-Executive Director)
  • Joshua Klemm (Co-Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Joshua Klemm (Co-Executive Director): $104,130 total reported compensation
  • Isabella Winkler (Co-Executive Director): $82,263 total reported compensation
  • Anake Lekkoon (Finance Director): $62,512 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

International Rivers protects rivers and defends the rights of communities that depend on them.

What it reported doing in 2025

Programs - International Rivers works with river-dependent and dam-affected communities to ensure their voices are heard and their rights are respected. International Rivers helps to build well-resourced, active networks of civil society groups to advocate for healthy rivers. International Rivers undertakes independent, investigative research, generating robust data and evidence to inform policies and campaigns. International Rivers exposes and resists destructive projects, while also engaging with all relevant stakeholders, including industry and policymakers, to develop a vision and energy and water solutions that protect rivers and the communities that depend upon them.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 95% 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. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.4%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 89%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: $25.73 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Pass
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Pass
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 75th 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: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 7.5%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.97; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.5%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.3% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.4% of revenue deployed · 89% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $104K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 49/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 27/100.