MSRW Mackinaw Straits Raptor Watch

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
831936124
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Petoskey, MI, USA
Phone
2316223426
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Wildlife Preservation, Protection

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$241,865
Expenses
$142,040
Assets
$474,095
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Scott Davis (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Scott Davis (Executive Director): $38,800 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Scientific Research on the migration of birds in the Straits of Mackinac located between the upper and lower peninsulas of Michigan. We also engage in educational and public information associated with this research.

What it reported doing in 2025

In 2024, MSRW began a new project to increase the gathering of information on bird migration through the Straits of Mackinac. A project of Birds Canada, the Motus network is "a collaborative global research network that uses automated radio telemetry to track small flying organisms." MSRW is constructing an array of six towers in the Straits and surrounding areas to capture migration information and share it with the public. A grant was awarded to support construction work in 2024 and 2025 and maintain the data collection. Seven towers were completed, including a pass-through project with the Greenwood Foundation in Wolverine, Michigan. These towers join 40 in Michigan and 200 in 34 countries gathering migration information from nanotags on a wide variety of migrants.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 72
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 46.1%; rating input score 46
  • Program expense ratio: 78.4%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: $23.29 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 10th 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: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 41.3%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.34; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 27.3%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.3% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 21.4% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 46.1% of revenue deployed · 78.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 7 filed program accomplishments · $111K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $39K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 40 of 41 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 46/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 59/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.