Red Ants Pants Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 451237337
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2013–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- White Sulphur Springs, MT, USA
- Phone
- 4062098236
- Rating
- 80
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Community, Neighborhood Development
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,273,630
- Expenses
- $1,352,488
- Assets
- $485,450
- Liabilities
- $140,891
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
9 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- COURTNEY COWGILL (PRESIDENT)
- CHRIS HEDRICH (VICE PRESIDENT)
- SARAH CALHOUN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- SARAH CALHOUN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $95,619 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The red ants pants foundation is organized to develop and expand leadership roles for women, to preserve and support working family farms and ranches and to enrich and promote rural communities.
What it reported doing in 2024
Rapf girls leadership program: this year-long leadership initiative empowers junior-year high school girls from rural Montana to grow as confident, community-minded leaders. Participants engage in three immersive weekend retreats, three interactive webinars, a one-on-one mentorship experience and they each develop and execute their own meaningful community project. The program is designed to cultivate hope in our youth, pride in our rural heritage and strength and courage in their leadership journeys. Additionally we host a weekend long retreat in eastern Montana for sophomore-year high school girls as well as an alumni program with continued in person and online programming.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 73% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 88
- Transparency & Controls: 73
- Accountability: 83
- Sustainability: 24
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 98.7%; rating input score 99
- Program expense ratio: 92.2%; rating input score 92
- Fundraising efficiency: $6.21 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 35.5%; rating input score 35; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- 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: -6.2%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.36; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.29; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 7.1%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 14.2% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 13.2% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 15.9% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 98.7% of revenue deployed · 92.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 9 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $1.2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $96K · 9 people listed
- Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2013 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 2 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.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 35/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 23/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 22/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 17/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 25/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 47/100.