Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
721314968
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Baton Rouge, LA, USA
Phone
2257655100
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Management & Technical Assistance

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,628,029
Expenses
$1,821,113
Assets
$5,909,884
Liabilities
$21,811

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • A KELL MCINNIS III (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MELISSA FOX (EXECUTIVE DI): $126,333 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To enhance the fish and wildlife resources in Louisiana. To promote the general welfare of the Louisiana department of wildlife and fisheries (dept.) and the Louisiana wildlife and fisheries commission (comm.). To develop, expand amd improve the facilities of the dept. And comm. In order to enhance their ability to perform their mission, encourage public enjoyment and use of fish and wildlife resources in Louisiana and to conserve and preserve wildlife and fisheries habitats. To further aid the dept., the foundation conducts research and develops programs that will communicate to the public, the aims, objectives and needs of the dept. And comm.

What it reported doing in 2025

Restore the earth foundation/forestry grant this foundation is working cooperatively with the Louisiana wildlife and fisheries foundation to fund for the restoration as well as donation of land adding to the total acreage of salvador wma.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 90
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 89.6%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $13.32 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 44; 44th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -11.9%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.25; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.9%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -14.9% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -16% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -5.8% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 89.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $126K · 17 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
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 44/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 11/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 46/100.