National Bobwhite and Grassland Initiative Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
882274233
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2022
Location
Maryville, TN, USA
Phone
3093610308
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Natural Resources Conservation and Protection

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,418,818
Expenses
$2,539,252
Assets
$1,049,098
Liabilities
$921,946

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • John J Morgan (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • John J Morgan (CEO): $111,135 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The partnership's mission is to restore and maintain wild northern bobwhite, associated species, and their native grassland habitats through sciencebased research and management to support healthy wildlife, soil, air, and water for the benefit of society.

What it reported doing in 2024

Coordinated Implementation Program (CIP) Support We are proud to highlight our foremost program service accomplishment providing unwavering support to the National Bobwhite and Grassland Initiative (NBGI) at Clemson University. Through our collaboration, we've enabled the Coordinated Implementation Program (CIP) and other state allowable activities. Our commitment to this partnership has yielded substantial progress in conserving critical wildlife habitats. The Coordinated Implementation Program (CIP) serves as a strategic cornerstone, facilitating large-scale habitat management efforts. By channeling resources and expertise, we're fostering innovative research, outreach, and on-ground projects that rejuvenate vital grassland habitats. Moreover, our support for state-allowable activities ensures adaptable, region-specific conservation strategies that contribute to a cohesive national conservation agenda. As a result, our efforts are manifest in expanded conserved grasslands, heightened habitat quality, and the revival of bobwhite quail populations. This accomplishment underscores our dedication to sustainable wildlife conservation and reinforces our pivotal role in advancing ecosystem health

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 91% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 62% 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 91
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 21
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 97.4%; rating input score 97
  • Program expense ratio: 92.8%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 81.8%; rating input score 82; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -5%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.41; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.88; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.4%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 98.6% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 90.5% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 67.4% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 97.4% of revenue deployed · 92.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 11 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $111K · 11 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $129K reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 26 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 20/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D other liabilities reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 8/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.