Montana Grizzly Scholarship Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
810407200
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Missoula, MT, USA
Phone
4062436481
Rating
89
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,744,466
Expenses
$4,384,408
Assets
$5,323,927
Liabilities
$4,101,784

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • COLESON RANDALL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • BRENNIN GRAINEY (CO-PRESIDENT)
  • JAMIE BUHR (CO-PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • COLESON RANDALL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $95,335 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 Montana grizzly scholarship association's (mgsa) primary objective is to raise scholarship funds for the university of Montana (um) student-athletes. The mgsa also assists the athletic department with various fundraising activities, and actively promotes interest in and awareness of all um sports programs. The mgsa, through its board of directors believes that a successful athletics program enhances the university experience for student-athletes and non-student-athletes alike as well as building a strong alliance with the community and alumni. We believe it is the responsibilty of the mgsa to help achieve these objectives by educating the general public and the student-athletes about the fiscal needs of the university of Montana's athletic program; building community support; and providing through development and fundraising programs, the private financial resources necessary to fund scholarships and other needs.

What it reported doing in 2024

Contributions to the university of Montana athletic programs. Athletic programs consist of football, men's and women's basketball, track, and other athletic programs. Mgsa provides scholarships for 250 student athletes.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 94% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 94
  • Transparency & Controls: 91
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 86%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $212.11 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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: 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: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -17.1%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.21; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.77; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.5%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.1% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 86% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $95K · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 37 of 38 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 44/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 11/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.