National Wild Turkey Federation

Legal name: National Wild Turkey Federation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
570564993
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024, Form 990-N 2007
Location
Edgefield, SC, US
Phone
(800) 843-6983
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Natural Resources Conservation and Protection

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$54,333,787
Expenses
$60,281,410
Assets
$31,831,916
Liabilities
$16,380,059

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

Leadership & pay

29 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Kurt Dyroff (Co-CEO (Conservation/Business Support))
  • Jason Burckhalter (Co-CEO (Marketing/Fundraising))
  • Parks Shackelford (President)
  • Dal Dyches (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Kurt Dyroff (Co-CEO (Conservation/Business Support)): $440,945 total reported compensation
  • Jason Burckhalter (Co-CEO (Marketing/Fundraising)): $440,944 total reported compensation
  • Barry Woods (National Director Of Event Fundraising): $205,761 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 National Wild Turkey Federation is dedicated to the conservation of the wild turkey and the preservation of our hunting heritage.

What it reported doing in 2024

Through a variety of outreach programs, the organziation actively educates the public on the value of hunting and the importance of wildlife conservation. These programs include: for youth, jakes (for ages 12 and younger), xtreme jakes (ages 13-17), women in the outdoors (women 14 and older seeking hands on outdoors instruction) and wheelin sportsmen (for sportsmen and women with disabitlities).

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 90% 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

STRONG - 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 16
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 92.1%; rating input score 92
  • Program expense ratio: 84.3%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $23.61 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 29.8%; rating input score 30; 8th 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; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -10.9%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.53; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.51; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 11 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 92.1% of revenue deployed · 84.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $50.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $441K · 29 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $10.7M reported
  • Consistency: 44 of 45 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 78 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 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.
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 30/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 35/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.