Mountain Studies Institue
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 731644103
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Durango, CO, USA
- Phone
- 9703875161
- Rating
- 84
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Natural Resources Conservation and Protection
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,620,859
- Expenses
- $1,776,122
- Assets
- $689,036
- Liabilities
- $474,236
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
11 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DR WESLEY BERG (PRESIDENT)
- CAL JOYNER (VICE PRESIDENT)
- ADREA C BOGLE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- MELISSA MAY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- MELISSA MAY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $52,023 total reported compensation
- ADREA C BOGLE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $14,424 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 empower communities, managers and scientists to innovate solutions through mountain research, education, and practice.
What it reported doing in 2025
Mountain studies institute mobilized nearly 3,000 volunteers and program participants in community science initiatives in 2025 to complement the work of our researchers in monitoring forest, water, and wildlife health. With staff support and auniquely designed set of protocols, volunteers gave their time to monitor bighorn, pika and the endangered pagosa skyrocketas well as support water quality testing. Our team of scientists worked across the san juan mountain region to increasecoverage of snowpack and forest monitoring, implement snow smart forestry initiatives, advance low tech ecologicalrestoration in key areas, and help build capacity of community based organizations to integrate science into their planning anddecision-making. We partnered with federal, state, local and tribal governments as well as private foundations to advanceenvironmental research, monitoring and education across the communities of the san juan mountains.
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 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 84
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 84
- Sustainability: 19
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 87.1%; rating input score 87
- Program expense ratio: 79.5%; rating input score 79
- Fundraising efficiency: $76.45 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 82; 82nd 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: Limited
- 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: 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: Fail
- 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: -9.6%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.39; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.69; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 3.7%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 10.3% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 10% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 9.3% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 87.1% of revenue deployed · 79.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $52K · 11 people listed
- Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 13/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 8/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 52/100.