Missouri Conservation Heritage Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
431797156
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Jefferson City, MO, USA
Phone
5736342080
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Environmental Education and Outdoor Survival Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,191,372
Expenses
$2,909,667
Assets
$17,493,988
Liabilities
$2,279,707

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • WILL COATES (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • TRICIA BURKHARDT (EXECUTIVE DI): $128,943 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The Missouri conservation heritage foundation advances the conservation and appreciation of forest, fish, and wildlife resources by applying financial resources to the priorities of the Missouri department of conservation in collaboration with donors and other partners.

What it reported doing in 2024

The stream stewardship trust fund is an in-lieu fee mitigation alternative for us army corps of engineers' 404 permit applicants. This trust fund creates a financial source to restore, preserve, and enhance stream systems within Missouri and is handled in accordance with a memorandum of understanding between the us army corps of engineers and the Missouri conservation heritage foundation.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 75% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 92% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 63
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 81
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 53.9%; rating input score 54
  • Program expense ratio: 84.3%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $13.88 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.2%; rating input score 88; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 85.5%; rating input score 86; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 44%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.01; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.4%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.3% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.1% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 53.9% of revenue deployed · 84.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 12 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $2.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $129K · 17 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $161K reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 35 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 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 54/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 48/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Independent members within voting members did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.