Phoenix Conservancy
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 813858018
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2023–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2022, Form 990-N 2019
- Location
- Pullman, WA, USA
- Phone
- 4257576890
- Rating
- 77
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Natural Resources Conservation and Protection
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $940,331
- Expenses
- $846,721
- Assets
- $150,040
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Christopher Duke (Executive Director, Board Member)
Highest reported compensation
- Christopher Duke (Executive Director, Board Member): $71,450 total reported compensation
- Shannon Collins (Prairie Restoration Project Manager): $57,829 total reported compensation
- Cullen Anderson (Madagascar Project Manager): $51,242 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Phoenix Conservancy's mission is to restore endangered ecosystems globally for the communities that depend on them and the conservation of biodiversity. We seek out the most critically-endangered ecosystems (10% or less intact) on a Local (Palouse prairie), National (Great Plains prairie), and Global (Madagascar rainforest) scale, where we use ecosystem restoration to combat 1) biodiversity loss, 2) climate change and resulting insecurity, desertification, and erosion, and 3) poverty and economic strife.
What it reported doing in 2025
The Madagascar program for The Phoenix Conservancy (TPC) supports restoration and fire protection for rainforest in Madagascar. We continued firebreak construction and initiated reforestation at hundreds of new sites, created thousands of local employment opportunities, and continued developing sustainable alternate livelihood projects in the region. In addition to continuing employment opportunities, and continued developing sustainable alternate livelihood projects in the region. In addition to continuing it possible for thousands of individuals to survive the world's first famine induced by climate change.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 78% 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
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 83
- Transparency & Controls: 55
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 41
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 77.7%; rating input score 78
- Program expense ratio: 86.3%; rating input score 86
- Fundraising efficiency: $951.44 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 97; 97th 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: Scored; rating input score 0
- Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 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: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 10%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.18; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 21.3%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 67.7% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 48% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 32.3% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 77.7% of revenue deployed · 86.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $730K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $71K · 6 people listed
- Consistency: 45 of 46 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
- 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: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 56/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.