Jane Goodall Institute for Wildlife Research Education and Conservation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 942474731
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Washington, DC, USA
- Phone
- 7036829220
- Rating
- 78
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Research Institutes and/or Public Policy Analysis
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $30,550,365
- Expenses
- $29,675,282
- Assets
- $22,558,265
- Liabilities
- $3,874,649
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
23 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ANNA RATHMANN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- SHAWN SWEENEY (ASSOC. V.PRESIDENT, COMM. & PARTNERSHI)
Highest reported compensation
- ANNA RATHMANN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $452,837 total reported compensation
- SUSANA NAME (VP, FOUNDER RELATIONS): $246,683 total reported compensation
- PAUL COWLES (CHIEF OF PARTY,USAID PROGRAMS TZ): $232,969 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To understand and protect chimpanzees, other apes, and their habitats, and to work towards creating an informed and compassionate critical mass of people who will help to create a better world for people, other animals, and our shared environment.
What it reported doing in 2024
Animal welfare and conservation: the institute produces high-impact conservation work in africa and is a leader in conservation science and research. Expenses relate to activities in which the institute is working closely with local communities and governments to protect great apes and their habitats, improve the well-being of human communities in and near these habitats, advance conservation research, and apply science and technology to conservation challenges. By skillfully integrating these critical components, the institute is using a holistic approach to achieve dr. Jane goodall's vision for our planet-a place where people, other animals, and the environment coexist in sustainable harmony.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 79% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 94% 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 75
- Transparency & Controls: 76
- Accountability: 90
- Sustainability: 40
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 78.8%; rating input score 79
- Program expense ratio: 80%; rating input score 80
- Fundraising efficiency: $9.43 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
- Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
- Requires narrative reports: Pass
- Conducts field audits: Limited
- May suspend future funding: Pass
- Requires financial reports: Limited
- Conducts site visits: Limited
- Requires grant agreements: Limited
- May require repayment: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 90%; rating input score 90; 22nd 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: 2.9%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.76; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.17; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 8.6%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 7.2% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 78.8% of revenue deployed · 80% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 10 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $23.7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $453K · 23 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.1M reported
- Consistency: 43 of 43 current checks pass
- Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 14 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 2 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 37/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 46/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 27/100.