Northwest Natural Resources Institute

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
911278614
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Spokane, WA, USA
Phone
5093213613
Rating
90
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Adult, Continuing Education

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$69,882
Expenses
$65,891
Assets
$89,458
Liabilities
$17,827

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jana McDonald (President)
  • Kevin Areson (Vice President)
  • Diahne Gill (Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • Jana McDonald (President)
  • Kevin Areson (Vice President)
  • Alisha Benson (Secretary/Treasurer)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Educating teachers and students about the importance of natural resources in their daily lives. NNRI does this through a variety of student programs and Educator workshops.

What it reported doing in 2024

Provide natural resource education for schools, youth programs, and the general public.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 89% 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.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 51
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86.7%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 91.6%; rating input score 92

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 5.7%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.36; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.2; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.4% per year; rating input score 0; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.8% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 86.7% of revenue deployed · 91.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $60K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 56/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 14/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.