Lake Pend Oreille Waterkeeper Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
264219188
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2021
Forms available
Form 990 2021, Form 990-EZ 2017
Location
Sandpoint, ID, USA
Phone
2085977188
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$139,922
Expenses
$156,668
Assets
$145,039
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • STEVE HOLT (EXECUTIVE DI): $42,991 total reported compensation
  • CAROLYN KNAACK (ASSOCIATE DI): $40,629 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Through education, partnership and advocacy, to protect the water quality of lake pend oreille, as well as to improve health and viability of the people and ecosystems which rely upon or live close to lake pend oreille.

What it reported doing in 2021

Lake pend oreille waterkeeper (lpow) worked to identify and implement viable alternatives to the use of chemical pesticides to control aquatic invasive weeds, including various methods of biological control. Additionally, lpow actively monitored and protected the water quality of lake pend oreille and its associated waterways through oversight of epa npdes permits, enforcement of sound stormwater management practices, and challenging unsound water management practices including loosening standards and regulations for pollutants. Lpow also participated in and hosted multiple events and coordinated numerous volunteer activities to 1) inform the broader community of lpow's mission and goals; and 2) spearhead activities that would have a direct positive impact on the water quality of the watershed.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 93% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 93
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 27
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 92.6%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: $23.03 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -12%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.93; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 53.4%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -10.3% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.2% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 92.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $145K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $43K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2018 to 2021
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 58/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.