Prairie Wildlife Research Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
460462687
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2017
Location
Stevens Point, WI, USA
Phone
9702191659
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Wildlife Preservation, Protection

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$368,642
Expenses
$398,096
Assets
$164,335
Liabilities
$13

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TRAVIS LIVIERI (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • JENNIFER S FAY (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • TRAVIS LIVIERI (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $85,823 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Prairie wildlife research was established in 2001 as a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization with the mission to research and conserve wildlife species of the prairie and their associated habitats. Pwr works throughout the great plains with federal and state agencies, universities, private landowners, and other non-governmental organizations to conduct timely, economical, and quality studies and projects that contribute to sound management decisions. Pwr's focus includes all wildlife species inhabiting the prairie. Projects include surveys, reintroductions of native species, habitat enhancement projects, and working with others to resolve wildlife-related issues.

What it reported doing in 2024

Black footed ferret monitoring and recovery of endangered species. Monitoring of other prairie wildlife species and monitoring of disease agents that threaten endangered animals.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 93
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 50
  • Sustainability: 27
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 98.3%; rating input score 98
  • Program expense ratio: 91.1%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: $45.67 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -8%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.41; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 21.6%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.5% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.7% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.1% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 98.3% of revenue deployed · 91.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 3 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $363K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $86K · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 25/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 59/100.