Isle Royale Natural History Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
386156566
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2020
Location
Houghton, MI, USA
Phone
9064827860
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Environmental Education and Outdoor Survival Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$239,230
Expenses
$232,716
Assets
$743,642
Liabilities
$7,947

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Mark Wilcox (Executive Director)
  • Sandra Wilhoit (President & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Mark Wilcox (Executive Director): $59,310 total reported compensation
  • Sharon Kisiel (Retail Sales Manager): $46,417 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Partner with the National Park Service to promote public understanding, appreciation, enjoyment and protection of the natural and cultural resources of Isle Royale National Park and Keweenaw National Historical Park through education, outreach and research. This is accomplished by providing high-quality interpretive products and programs, supporting the parks' interpretive, preservation, conservation and research activities.

What it reported doing in 2024

Financial Assistance to Isle Royale National Park and Keweenaw National Historical Park. Funding was provided for: printing the 2024 Greenstone and Keweenaw Guide newspapers for distribution to park and area visitors; staffing three seasonal park interpreter positions at Isle Royale National Park and Keweenaw National Historical Park; travel and lodging for seasonal interpretive training; purchasing books for the interpretive library; revising and printing park brochures; acquiring supplies for family and youth programs, community events, and new exhibits, college students conducting research regarding the parks' mission and park management priorities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 66% for direct work, and 34% for grants.

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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 77.3%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1.14 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 13th 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: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2.7%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.2; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 45.4%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.6% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 77.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $180K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $59K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 6/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 46/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 45/100.