Klamath Bird Observatory

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
931297400
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Ashland, OR, USA
Phone
5412010866
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Bird Sanctuary, Preserve

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,922,610
Expenses
$1,529,240
Assets
$990,477
Liabilities
$120,769

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SHANNON RIO (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOHN ALEXANDER (DIRECTOR (EX-OFFICIO)): $179,956 total reported compensation
  • JAIME STEPHENS (CONSERVATION DIRECTOR (EX-OFFICIO): $123,201 total reported compensation
  • RYAN TERRILL (SCIENCE DIRECTOR (EX-OFFICIO)): $95,447 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Klamath bird observatory advances bird and habitat conservation through science, education, and partnerships.

What it reported doing in 2025

Klamath bird observatory continues to advance bird and habitat conservation through science, education, and partnerships. We emphasize high caliber science and the role of birds as ecological indicators. Kbo implements cost-effective bird monitoring and research projects and brings results from our integrated science program to bear through a science delivery approach involving partner-driven engagement in conservation planning. We offer professional and community education programs. Our work primarily occurs in the pacific northwest, with intensive focus in klamath-siskiyou bioregion of southern Oregon and northern California. Our efforts also expand throughout the migratory ranges of the birds of our region, with international collaborations in mexico, south america, and the carribean.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 85% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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 - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. 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: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 52.9%; rating input score 53
  • Program expense ratio: 66.4%; rating input score 66
  • Fundraising efficiency: $49.64 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 20.5%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.65; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 30.6%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.9% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 52.9% of revenue deployed · 66.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $180K · 10 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 53/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.