Southwest Idaho Resource Conservation and Development Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
820476738
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Meridian, ID, USA
Phone
2088881890
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Natural Resources Conservation and Protection

Reported finances

Revenue
$255,877
Expenses
$217,146
Assets
$198,696
Liabilities
$8,999

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TOM BICAK (PRESIDENT)
  • DEBBIE COOK (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • SUSIE HICKS (MEMBER): $1,422 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To enhance the quality of life for residents of rc&d area by identifying problems, setting common objectives, goals, implementing projects, by providing planning, education, and technical assistance for conservation and development of natural resources.

What it reported doing in 2024

Forest service - forest service project objectives are: 1. To improve the resiliency, health and sustainability of the terrestial, wetland and aquatic ecosystems in the southwest Idaho area through a partnership and collaborative process that involves the rc&d and the us forst service. 2. To identify and explore specific restoration goals for the boise and payette national forests that are widely supported by partners, scientists and managers, and the rc&d emphasizing efforts that address forest challenges. 3. To ensure that restoration will be guided by sound science. 3. To work together to promote ecological restoration activities by supporting initiatives led by partners. 4. To encourage constructive dialogue and the application of the best science or best management practices. 5. Inform and educate us forest service staff, rc&d council and executive board, and partners about current and planned ecological restoration activities and results. 6. To strengthen us forest service relationships with partners through routine or specific involvement in project planning and implementation. 7. Promote and/or support projects that meet the rc&d goals to improve the economy and enrich lives in the communities as guided by the rc&d five year area plan.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 90% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 80
  • Sustainability: 51
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 77.5%; rating input score 77
  • Program expense ratio: 91%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 74.3%; rating input score 74; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 15.1%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.92; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.7%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.6% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 77.5% of revenue deployed · 91% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $198K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 33/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 37/100.