Pinchot Partners
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 203689613
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2024–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2017
- Location
- Morton, WA, USA
- Phone
- 5132550025
- Rating
- 72
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Forest Conservation
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $123,614
- Expenses
- $73,453
- Assets
- $66,923
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
People named in this filing
- JOHN O'BRIEN (CHAIR)
- JOHN SQUIRES (VICE-CHAIR)
- ASHLEY SHORT (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
Pinchot partners seeks to break down the walls between the forest service and the community. Work with community memebers and the forest service to educate and integrate people.
What it reported doing in 2024
Reconciliation of united states forest service and the local community- there is a decade's long animosity between between the forest service and the permanent residents of the cowlitz valley. The forest service routinely rotates personnel through districts for they do not assimilate into the community. This is by design. The local community regards the forest service as an "occupying army" located in their community. Forest service communication with the local community has historically been absent or minimal. There is truly an "us and them" attitude. This mentality does not serve the community, the forest service, or the national forest well. From its inception, pinchot partners has sought to break down the walls between the forest service and the community. We hold monthly and annual meetings where community members and forest service staff alike are invited to provide feedback. Joint meetings have now become the norm with pinchot partners attending forest service integrated team meetings (idt). We hold field trips for community members with the forest service to educate and integrate people.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 85% 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 total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 71
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 66
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 56.7%; rating input score 57
- Program expense ratio: 95.5%; rating input score 95
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 40.6%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.91; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 56.7% of revenue deployed · 95.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $70K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 57/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 56/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.