Muskies Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
416056119
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-T 2025
Location
Waukesha, WI, USA
Phone
8887108286
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$245,491
Expenses
$265,695
Assets
$317,976
Liabilities
$72,086

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JAMES ASHTON (President)
  • JIM MOORE (Vice President)
  • JEFF MICHOLIC (Vice President)
  • LILA WARREN (Vice President)
  • Steve Worrall (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • JAMES ASHTON (President)
  • JIM MOORE (Vice President)
  • DENIS VISCEK (Treasurer)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Research based on sound scientific merit, and carried out by authorized federal or state agencies, appropriate academic insitutions, muskies inc. Chapters and their members. We are committed to the abatement of water pollution, maintenace of records for muskie habitats, growth and range, and the dissemination of muskie information, as well as muskie fishing by youth.

What it reported doing in 2025

Activities related to promoting the mission of muskies, inc including teaching children about environmental sciences through the sport of muskie fishing. The gil hamm fund is a premanently restricted fund for research projects that has a base amount of $100,000. The interest earned is available to chapters for research projects that benefit fisheries.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 70% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 88% 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 - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 85.4%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 74.6%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 81.8%; rating input score 82; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 24.5%; rating input score 24; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: -8.2%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.2; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.23; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.7% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.9% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 85.4% of revenue deployed · 74.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $198K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 22 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2018 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 24/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 46/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 15/100.