Pennsylvania Organization for Watersheds and Rivers Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
251719174
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2017
Location
Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Phone
4124819400
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$452,611
Expenses
$439,021
Assets
$909,257
Liabilities
$807,754

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • PATRICK STARR (BOARD CHAIR): $175,802 total reported compensation
  • JANET SWEENEY (SECRETARY): $101,577 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Pennsylvania organization for watersheds and rivers (powr) provides the tools, training, education and resources that empower community watershed organization leaders and volunteers to protect and restore rivers and streams, advocate for sound water resource management and policies, and facilitate stewardship and enjoyment of Pennsylvania's waterways.

What it reported doing in 2025

Outreach and education: we offer tools and resources that enable community watershed organizations (cwos) to remain active and viable. These include webinars on topics ranging from insurance, retaining volunteers, board development, cleanups, riparian buffer development, succession planning, and funding. We offer networking and educational opportunities at regional and statewide workshops and conferences. We host a robust website that connects cwos to one another as well as an expanded professional network of providers of services, promotes their volunteer opportunities and stewardship events, and spotlights cwo accomplishments. For more information, please visit our website at www.pawatersheds.org.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 89% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Multi-channel. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 22% for direct work, 26% for grants, and 52% for affiliated organizations.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 83
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 85%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 86.9%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.07; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.89; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.8%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 15.3% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.3% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16.5% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 85% of revenue deployed · 86.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 10 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $381K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $176K · 10 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2019 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 8 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 29/100.