Mount St Helens Institute

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
911569993
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Amboy, WA, USA
Phone
3604497883
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Environmental Education and Outdoor Survival Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,269,294
Expenses
$1,298,103
Assets
$674,604
Liabilities
$175,513

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ALYSSA HOYT (CO-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • ABI GROSKOPF (CO-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ALYSSA HOYT (CO-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $95,305 total reported compensation
  • ABI GROSKOPF (CO-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $94,822 total reported compensation
  • JENNIFER STEWARD (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $81,873 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 advance understanding and stewardship of the earth through science, education and exploration of volcanic landscapes

What it reported doing in 2025

Develop and implement youth education programs at mount st. Helens (msh) and in communities to educate youth about science, technology, culture, and social-emotional well-being. Conduct guided exploration programs for all ages at msh, educating participants on leave no trace and the natural and cultural history, geology, and ecology; conduct adult educational lecture series and field seminars in clark, cowlitz, and skamania counties; recruit, train and manage usda forest service and state park volunteers who engage with the general public, rove hiking trails, and assist with trail maintenance and stewardship.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 93% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69%; rating input score 69
  • Program expense ratio: 67.3%; rating input score 67
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.4 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 16.3%; rating input score 16; 30th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 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: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2.3%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.52; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.26; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 21%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.9% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 69% of revenue deployed · 67.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $874K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $95K · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 16/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 24/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 21/100.