Montana Public Interest Research Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
810486984
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2021, Form 990-N 2015
Location
Missoula, MT, USA
Phone
4062432908
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Consumer Protection

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$187,545
Expenses
$238,870
Assets
$173,191
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DEAN MCGOVERN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • DEAN MCGOVERN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $58,958 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 montpirg leadership fund is dedicated to educating and mentoring the next generation of civic leaders. Through research and education, we empower citizens to be a strong voice for a clean and healthful environment, open and accountable government, and strong consumer protections.

What it reported doing in 2024

Montpirg leadership fund creates positive, tangible change in Montana montpirg leadership fund is dedicated to training the next generation of civic leaders through experiential learning and advocacy. We address important issues facing Montana including protecting our environment, advancing clean energy, empowering young voters, and defending consumer rights. In 2024-2025, montpirg leadership fund educated dozens of student leaders who visited thousands of households to discuss clean water, soil, and air. Montpirg students registered new voters, educating them, and getting them out to participate in elections voter engagement registering to vote is one of the first steps to civic engagement. Montpirg students set out each year to register new voters. Our teams work to make access to registering to vote as easy and accessible as possible. Working throughout the missoula and bozeman communities, we help thousands of young people have as much opportunity as possible to vote. By directly linking candidates with students, mobilizing student voter turnout, and equipping young people with the necessary tools and resources to cast their ballots effectively, we facilitated informed participation in the electoral process. Through on-campus informational events, candidate forums, and rallies, we helped young folks prepare to cast their votes. While local government may seem distant to many young voters, we recognize that local decision-makers often have the greatest impact on individuals' daily lives, making it imperative to connect young and first-time voters with these offcials to amplify youthful voices in the democratic process. In 2025, montpirg leadership fund also engaged montanans about the 2025 legislative session. We partnered with local organizations. We held information sessions, made phone calls, and turned out citizens to speak out at legislative hearings. In all, we informed montanans about this critical process and empowered dozens to speak up for good policy. Standing up for the environment in the summer of 2024, montpirg leadership fund engaged in signature gathering and canvassing efforts to help ban certain plastic products from bozeman and missoula. This was an effort to keep plastics out of our water and environment. Leadership development at the core of montpirg leadership fund's mission lies a commitment to leadership development. Recognizing the role young leaders play across society, our primary objective is to empower these individuals with the necessary tools and knowledge to advocate effectively for themselves and their communities. This year, we conducted intensive training sessions for cohorts of interns in bozeman and missoula, focusing on a diverse range of skills such as fundraising, grassroots organizing (including door knocking and phone calling), written communication (including letter writing), public speaking, event coordination, and peer-to-peer outreach. In addition to our intern program, we actively engage volunteers who collaborate with interns and staff to cultivate these proficiencies and drive meaningful change. Crucially, participants gain hands-on experience by addressing pressing projects and issues directly impacting both themselves and their community members, amplifying their impact and enhancing their leadership capabilities.

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 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 88.4%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 69.4%; rating input score 69
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.44 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -27.4%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.73; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.6%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 32.1% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.9% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 23.8% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 88.4% of revenue deployed · 69.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $166K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $59K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 35/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 36/100.