The Jmt Wilderness Conservancy
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 853608502
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2020–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Truckee, CA, USA
- Phone
- 6509809988
- Rating
- 80
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Natural Resources Conservation and Protection
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $4,877,386
- Expenses
- $4,426,274
- Assets
- $5,357,225
- Liabilities
- $4,600,462
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
14 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MARLA STARK (PRESIDENT & CHAIR OF THE BOARD)
Highest reported compensation
- MARLA STARK (PRESIDENT & CHAIR OF THE BOARD): $200,210 total reported compensation
- SPENCER COLLOM (DIRECTOR OF PROGRAMS & OPERATIONS): $128,814 total reported compensation
- SARA BARNES (DIRECTOR OF FINANCE & ACCOUNTING): $62,797 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Working to restore the watersheds, wilderness, and wildlife in the high sierra Nevada following the john muir trail (est. 1915) for all life in California.
What it reported doing in 2024
The mission of the jmt wilderness conservancy is to expand and restore the meadow ecosystems and riparian corridors of the central sierra Nevada encompassed by the historic john muir trail, the first and oldest recreational trail in america. This high elevation terrain is covered in snow during winters and bursting with accelerated spring growth in spring/summer. Covering roughly 2.8 million acres, it is vitally important to absorb and infiltrate water, and hold it in the sierra Nevada watersheds for year-round release into California's mighty rivers. It is also critical habitat for an enormous range of biodiverse species, many of them uniquely endemic to this region.studies and reports indicate that over 60% of the wet meadow alpine terrain in California has been lost in the last two hundred years. The reasons are many: voracious resource extraction, development and road construction, seasonal grazing by sheep and cattle, the decimation of native beaver species for fur trapping, and the forced (and often violent) removal of indigenous peoples who aptly managed this terrain with traditional practices. In the last 50 years, intense and growing recreational use has also taken a significant toll. Jmt wild works with federal land owners, scientists and specialists, conservation corps and indigenous tribes in local areas to assess, map and model, design restoration plans. Our team implements those plans and monitors the progress to expand and restore these meadow ecosystems and riparian corridors from mount whitney to yosemite valley. To obtain the required field data to understand the terrain and implement restoration, jmt wild operates a seasonal monitoring program when undergraduates in environmental fields are recruited and trained in the techniques and methods for accurate and repeatable data collection. Since fy 2024, we operated under a general appropriations grant from the California natural resources agency and private sector funding. In addition to water resiliency and habitat restoration, ancillary benefits from this work include the re-opening of natural fire breaks to improve forest health and slow wildfires, powerful carbon sequestration to mitigate climate change, and more sustainable recreational access and use.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 90% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- 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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 80
- Transparency & Controls: 79
- Accountability: 86
- Sustainability: 47
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 78.1%; rating input score 78
- Program expense ratio: 85.4%; rating input score 85
- Fundraising efficiency: $36.05 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 9.2%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.21; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.86; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 8.9%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 44.3% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 39.7% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 57.3% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 78.1% of revenue deployed · 85.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 10 of 12 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.8M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $200K · 14 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.3M reported
- Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 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.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 44/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 9/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 34/100.