Montana Conservation Voters Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
810521030
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Helena, MT, USA
Phone
4062541593
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard

Reported finances

Revenue
$967,860
Expenses
$748,984
Assets
$712,155
Liabilities
$58,424

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • WHITNEY TAWNEY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • WHITNEY TAWNEY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $115,100 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Montana conservation voters protects our clean air, clean water, public lands and democracy by supporting leaders who fight for these rights and by holding accountable leaders who do not.

What it reported doing in 2024

Voter education and state legislative session: mcv plays an important role in Montana's legislative process. Each legislative session, we meet with legislators and serve as a resource to them on conservation, energy, and democracy issues. As the convener of the conservation working group with our sister organization, the mcv education fund, mcv leads the conservation community's efforts to ensure that elected leaders understand the issues, hear the concerns of montanans and know the importance of voting in alignment with mcv's priorities. During the session, we also lead efforts to educate and mobilize montanans on our policy priorities. After the legislative session concludes, mcv releases its annual legislative scorecard to celebrate Montana's conservation and democracy champions and hold all others accountable. During off-session years, mcv follows the implementation of laws through the regulatory process and provides comments to agencies and other decision makers when relevant. We educate voters on the records of candidates in elections at every level by endorsing candidates that align with our values and disseminating endorsement guides to our supporters.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 81% 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 - 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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 56.2%; rating input score 56
  • Program expense ratio: 72.1%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: $24.03 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 63; 63rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 22.6%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.95; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.8%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4.5% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.9% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 56.2% of revenue deployed · 72.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $540K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $115K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 56/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 41/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 45/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 48/100.