Muskies Inc First WI Chapter 6
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 331038251
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2023–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2022
- Location
- Chippewa Falls, WI, USA
- Phone
- 7155798035
- Rating
- 92
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Wildlife Preservation, Protection
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $89,498
- Expenses
- $80,468
- Assets
- $86,987
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
14 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JOSH RABSKA (President)
People named in this filing
- JOSH RABSKA (President)
- KEVIN RABSKA (Director)
- JACK GERLACH (Director)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The improvement of the amateur sport of muskie fishing and to unite all muskie-fishing interests for the promotion and protection of a high-quality muskellunge sport fishery. We will accomplish this by supporting conservation practices, especially catch and release, and research based on sound scientific merit, and carried out by authorized federal or state agencies, appropriate academic institutions, muskies inc. Chapters and their members. We are committed to the abatement of water pollution, maintenance 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
Events and outings related to promoting the mission of muskies, inc, and grants to other organizations for the purpose of promoting the mission of muskies, inc.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 84% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 90
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 50
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 86.7%; rating input score 87
- Program expense ratio: 96.5%; rating input score 96
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 10.1%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.08; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 8.8% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 39.1% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 20.9% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 86.7% of revenue deployed · 96.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $78K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 14 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 50/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.