International Society for the Protection of Mustangs and Burros

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
946169422
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Rapid City, SD, USA
Phone
6054302088
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$243,333
Expenses
$244,242
Assets
$328,502
Liabilities
$4,461

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KAREN SUSSMAN (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • KAREN SUSSMAN (PRESIDENT): $45,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The organization's mission is to protect, preserve, and understand wild horses and burros as well as their habitat.

What it reported doing in 2025

Ispmb has managed four wild herds of horses collecting data over eighteen years pertaining to their natural behaviors including herd growth. Ispmb continues to study its rare spanish gila herd which it has managed for more than twenty-five years gaining valuable behavioral information. The gila herd remains in ispmb's conservation program. With this information, ispmb has created a "model" for managing america's wild horses. Ispmb's intent is to transform how wild horses are managed on public lands, protecting their natural wild behaviors by understanding them as the wildlife species they are. Ispmb has given the bureau of land management and the united states forest service (the agencies) many of its programs early on including the wild horse and burro adoption program which is now a national program and intends to make sure this "model management program" is accepted by the agencies. Ispmb continues to operate its rescue program for wild horses and burros. Ispmb has begun efforts to create its international wild horse and burro heritage center, a healing center for people, animals, and our mother earth. Ispmb received 119,745 in donated services which includes 6,000 in social media monitoring and 113,499 in legal services.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 80
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 67.3%; rating input score 67
  • Program expense ratio: 65.7%; rating input score 66
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.17 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 22nd 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: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.4%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.34; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.4%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -19.1% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -6.7% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 20.8% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 67.3% of revenue deployed · 65.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 4 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $160K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $45K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 25/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 34/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 49/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 37/100.