Monarch Joint Venture

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
831343107
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
St Paul, MN, USA
Phone
6512227631
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,994,828
Expenses
$3,199,566
Assets
$3,713,091
Liabilities
$132,455

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • WENDY CALDWELL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • WENDY CALDWELL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $122,306 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 protect monarchs and their migration by collaborating with partners to deliver habitat conservation, education, and science across the united states.

What it reported doing in 2025

The monarch joint venture is a nonprofit organization that facilitates a national partnership of federal and state agencies, other nonprofits, community groups, businesses, and academic programs working together to conserve monarch butterflies, other pollinators, and the habitat that sustains them. Since 2008, the mjv has brought a network of collaborators together from across the united states to advance these science-based conservation, education, scientific, and collaborative goals. These actions are organized in a regularly updated monarch conservation implementation framework, which serves a guide to conservation planning for individuals, partners, and other interested parties nationally.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 64% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 84% 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 available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 57
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 61
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 66.7%; rating input score 67
  • Program expense ratio: 83.1%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $19.68 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 21.9%; rating input score 22; 17th 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: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 19.9%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.16; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.8%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 23.1% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 24.6% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 34.8% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 66.7% of revenue deployed · 83.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $122K · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 6 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 22/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 58/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.