Nashville Zoo
Legal name: Nashville Zoo Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 621411210
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Aug 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-T 2025
- Location
- Nashville, TN, US
- Phone
- 615-833-1534
- Rating
- 75
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Zoo, Zoological Society
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $69,968,685
- Expenses
- $37,045,229
- Assets
- $214,943,951
- Liabilities
- $8,127,975
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
45 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- RICK SCHWARTZ (PRESIDENT)
- DAVID OEHLER (VICE PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- RICK SCHWARTZ (PRESIDENT): $853,982 total reported compensation
- KIM PRIDGEN (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $281,110 total reported compensation
- DAVID OEHLER (VICE PRESIDENT): $276,622 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 inspire a culture of understanding and discovery of our natural world through conservation, innovation and leadership.
What it reported doing in 2025
Nashville zoo is proud to share that, in 2025, we once again made significant strides in global conservation efforts, while continuing to serve as a vital resource for education and family fun in our community. We invested more than one million dollars in conservation work around the globe. Our expert keepers worked with conservationists on the ground, supporting critical efforts with giraffes in botswana, puerto rican crested toads in puerto rico, and helped raise and rehabilitate cheetah cubs in somaliland in east africa. Additionally, our veterinary team partnered with tristar skyline medical center on a study using thromboelastography (teg) to better understand how giant anteater blood clots and assisted with the first-ever cross-species blood transfusion for audubon zoo's giant anteater. Nashville zoo released 17 eastern hellbenders back into the wild, worked to protect the critically endangered nashville crayfish, participated in the aza safe north america monarch butterfly program, and installed a pollinator garden at liberty elementary. Students of all ages, from toddlers to college interns, connected with the natural world through our educational programs. Visitors to the zoo experienced unforgettable moments, including the public debut of aardwolves and moon jellyfish. Guests also were able to watch our clouded leopard cub birth announcements nationally and through our veterinary nursery windows; and welcomed new babies like chive, the red river hog, beni, the southern pudu, and two serval kittens. Supporters were introduced to our new highland cow, hamish nationally on good morning america. Noteworthy improvements were made to the guest experience with the opening of the long-awaited leopard forest. This was the largest opening the zoo has had and we saw over 22,000 people opening weekend. Nashville zoo also celebrated 1.39million in attendance and 41,955 membership households.
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 96% 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 62
- Transparency & Controls: 70
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 79
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 49.7%; rating input score 50
- Program expense ratio: 85.7%; rating input score 86
- Fundraising efficiency: $20.79 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
- Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
- Requires narrative reports: Fail
- Conducts field audits: Fail
- May suspend future funding: Fail
- Requires financial reports: Fail
- Conducts site visits: Fail
- Requires grant agreements: Fail
- May require repayment: Fail
- Grant itemization coverage: 79.3%; rating input score 79; 23rd 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; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 47.1%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.8; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 7.4%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 9.8% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 10% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 12.2% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 49.7% of revenue deployed · 85.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 33 of 33 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $31.8M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $854K · 45 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.8M reported
- Consistency: 40 of 42 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 27 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 15 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 50/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 46/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
- 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.