Stillwater Valley Watershed Council

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
900641225
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2019, Form 990-N 2013
Location
Absarokee, MT, USA
Phone
4063211235
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Natural Resources Conservation and Protection

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$602,086
Expenses
$567,200
Assets
$364,031
Liabilities
$100

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • LINDSEY CLARK (COORDINATOR): $40,400 total reported compensation
  • FAY L ESPELAND (TREASURER): $8,248 total reported compensation
  • TOMMY FLANAGAN (ASSISTANT COORDINATOR): $950 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Stillwater Valley Watershed Council SVWC will provide an open forum in which all interested parties may work in a collaborative effort to preservie the integrity of the river, the land, an the beauty of our valley. We will endeavor to bring together public, private and government resources, funding and grants to achieve our goals.

What it reported doing in 2024

COOPERATIVE WEED CONTROL PROGRAMS SMALL AND LARGE ACREAGE, integrated, locally led approaches to noxious weed management enabling SVWC to collaborate with multiple agencies and hundreds of local landowners. Programs include SVWCs SMALL ACREAGE Cooperative Weed Control Program has treated weeds from Nye to Columbus Montana. This program is intended for landowners with LESS than 20 acres. Tallies for 2024 Enrolled 100 participants, including 1800 acres, to treat noxious weeds on 211 acres and provided cost-share to 8 participants in the amount of 2,880. SVWC used 3 commercial applicators and paid them 34,724. SVWC Large Acreage Noxious Weed Control Program targets landowners with MORE than 20 acres located on or adjacent to elk habitat. SVWC received another 20,000 from the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation RMEF for 2023-2024. RMEF has contributed 159,000 over the past 14 years to this program. Tallies for 2024 Provided cost-share to 12 participants, representing 14,200 acres, to treat 400 acres via areal and ground application and provided cost-share in the amount of 9,815.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 76% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 58% for direct work, and 42% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 88.2%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 93.9%; rating input score 94
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 96.6%; rating input score 97; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 5.8%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.64; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.7%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 27% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 19.6% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 21.2% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 88.2% of revenue deployed · 93.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $532K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $40K · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 52/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 41/100.