Tennessee Wildlife Resources Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
621806324
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Nashville, TN, USA
Phone
6158319311
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$19,778,172
Expenses
$5,274,414
Assets
$14,404,267
Liabilities
$5,313,495

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JEFF MCMILLIN (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MARK MOORE (PRESIDENT/CHAIR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOEY WOODARD (PROGRAM DIRECTOR): $143,529 total reported compensation
  • ERIC CHANCE (COO): $125,223 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 Tennessee wildlife resources foundation, inc. (twrf) was established to benefit wildlife resources in Tennessee. The twrf's mission is to promote habitat conservation and restortion, responsible land stweardship and Tennessee's rich hunting and fishing heritage. The cornerstone of the twrf mission is its commitment to support the Tennessee wildlife resources agency. This partnership and cooperative effort yields benefits for Tennessee's sportsman and women through support of strategic land acquisition, funding for wildlife research and various youth education programs.

What it reported doing in 2024

The foundation is also the sole member of the tsmp, a Tennessee limited liability company, created to administer an in-lieu fee (ilf) program under sections 401 and 404 of the clean water act. Under the terms of a 2013 in- lieu-fee instrument signed by various governmental agencies, the tsmp is responsible for development, design, implementation, monitoring and maintenance of the mitigation projects which have been required under the clean water act. The united states army corps of engineers (usace), in consultation with the interagency review team (irt), must approve all compensatory mitigation projects and the tsmp must submit annual monitoring reports for a minimum of five years after completion of construction. Impacts authorized through permit sections 401 and 404 of the clean water act often require compensatory mitigation. Permittees may mitigate for impacts themselves, purchase credits from a mitigation bank or pay a third-party ilf program provider to conduct the mitigation on their behalf. The tsmp is one such third-party ilf program provider.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 70% for direct work, and 30% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 77
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 60.6%; rating input score 61
  • Program expense ratio: 77.3%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.84 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 73.3%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.73; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.37; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.1%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.2% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.1% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.7% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 60.6% of revenue deployed · 77.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $4.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $144K · 15 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 20/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 39/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 50/100.