Northeastern Minnesotans for Wilderness

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
010743018
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
ELY, MN, USA
Phone
2183657808
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Natural Resources Conservation and Protection

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,543,337
Expenses
$3,219,906
Assets
$2,519,740
Liabilities
$186,369

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

Leadership & pay

26 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • INGRID LYONS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • INGRID LYONS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $124,863 total reported compensation
  • ALEX FALCONER (PROGRAM DIRECTOR): $113,738 total reported compensation
  • MATT NORTON (PROGRAM DIRECTOR): $112,248 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

See schedule o.northeastern minnesotans for wilderness is the region-based advocacy group created by area residents to protect the bwcaw and other wild places. Nmw's mission is to unite people to advocate for the protection of wilderness and wild places, especially the boundary waters canoe area wilderness and the greater quetico-superior ecosystem.

What it reported doing in 2024

See schedule o.litigation: challenge government approvals for mining in the boundary waters canoe area wilderness (bwcaw) watershed. Activities - continued to support state mera case, which saw the mn dnr release court-remanded findings of fact in may 2023, challenging the conclusions of the dnr on the issue of water quality; contested case hearing took place november 2024.lease cancelation lawsuit brought by twin metals dismissed and twin metals' subsequently appealed in 2023. We continued to track the appeal, and oral arguments were heard in dc court of appeals in january 2025research project and policy proposals and their impact: monitor corporate and government websites and publications to identify projects related to mining in the watershed of the bwcaw; evaluate or use contract services as needed to assess potential impacts; develop fact sheets and maps on proposals and impacts.activities continued to implement field studies to establish baseline conditions in headwaters; provided expert opinion in lawsuits, legal, and administrative proceedings; provided over 90% of data used by Minnesota pollution control agency to include birch lake on impaired waters list as impaired for sulfate pollution , which was approved by epa in may 2024. Educate and engage the public: develop information for general distribution on projects and impacts; distribute via pertinent channels such as website, social media, news releases, public forums, etc.; respond to media inquiries; develop other outreach materials and host events for interested citizens. Activities - as information becomes available or the issue changes, fact sheets are updated and added to the website and distributed accordingly. More than 100 email alerts were distributed to supporter lists. At least 8 press releases published. At least 10 major media publications initiated and published. Weekly postings on twitter, facebook, instagram, and linkedin. Posted at least 25 blogs. Held dozens of public outreach events in person and virtually.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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

STRONG - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 59
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 55.9%; rating input score 56
  • Program expense ratio: 78.1%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.77 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 29.1%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.78; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.9%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.9% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.4% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 55.9% of revenue deployed · 78.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 23 of 23 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $125K · 26 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $191K reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 56/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 27/100.