Mzuri Wildlife Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 237074651
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Greenbrae, CA, USA
- Phone
- 7077424167
- Rating
- 77
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Wildlife Preservation, Protection
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $417,839
- Expenses
- $447,842
- Assets
- $2,852,277
- Liabilities
- $1,096
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- HOLLY K GARRISON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (END 8/24))
- AMANDA C NELSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (START 11/24))
- CYNDI FLANNIGAN (PRESIDENT)
- KEN WOOD (VICE PRESIDENT)
- PETER M CODDING (SECOND VICE PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- HOLLY K GARRISON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (END 8/24)): $120,340 total reported compensation
- AMANDA C NELSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (START 11/24)): $43,269 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Mzuri wildlife foundation is dedicated to promoting wildlife conservation and educating and encouraging the next generation of outdoor sports enthusiasts with an emphasis on women and youth.
What it reported doing in 2024
International conservation - support of direct grassroots efforts in africa and other countries that enhance and protect wildlife and the communities most affected by diminishing natural habitats. Ongoing support for local schools, wildlife anti-poaching efforts, habitat enhancements and outdoor education programs.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 84% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 66% of its reported program spending out as grants.
- 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 reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 78
- Transparency & Controls: 77
- Accountability: 79
- Sustainability: 44
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 82.7%; rating input score 83
- Program expense ratio: 72.8%; rating input score 73
- Fundraising efficiency: $33.99 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
- Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
- Requires narrative reports: Fail
- Conducts field audits: Fail
- May suspend future funding: Fail
- Requires financial reports: Pass
- Conducts site visits: Pass
- Requires grant agreements: Fail
- May require repayment: Fail
- Grant itemization coverage: 90.5%; rating input score 91; 52nd 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- 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: -7.2%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.37; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 36.5%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 10.1% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 8.9% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 3.8% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 82.7% of revenue deployed · 72.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $326K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $120K · 10 people listed
- Consistency: 25 of 27 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 4 filed related-organization links
- 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 5 of 8 not reported.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 26/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.