The Montana Land Reliance
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 810369262
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2020–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Aug 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Helena, MT, US
- Phone
- +1-406-443-7027
- Rating
- 83
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Land Resources Conservation
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $26,137,405
- Expenses
- $23,197,893
- Assets
- $36,860,365
- Liabilities
- $217,720
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- SHANE COLTON (PRESIDENT)
- TAYA R CROMLEY PHD (VICE-PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- KENDALL VAN DYK (MANAGING DIRECTOR): $147,203 total reported compensation
- JORDAN VANA (MANAGING DIRECTOR): $135,551 total reported compensation
- KATIE STOKES (MANAGING DIRECTOR): $123,501 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Conservation, grounded in partnership. Since 1978, The Montana Land Reliance (MLR) has partnered with Montana's landowners to permanently protect agricultural lands, fish and wildlife habitat, and open space. The lasting benefits of MLR's work are the perpetuation of a lifestyle and an economy that rely on responsibly managed private land and increasingly valuable Montana open spaces that will continue to nourish the spirit of future generations.
What it reported doing in 2024
Education and outreach activities: mlr staff travel across the state of Montana conducting meetings with potential clients, county planning boards, county commissioners, various agricultural groups/organizations, and other community groups to provide answers to their questions and to conduct general educational activities focused on the benefits of land conservation and conservation easements. For these outreach activities, mlr publishes various educational brochures and an annual report to provide information and enhance the transparency of its public interest activities. Additionally, staff participate with numerous conservation groups to educate the public about the land trust community's conservation efforts. In 2024, mlr granted $26,250 to the ruby habitat foundation for outreach use, and 456,834 to the Montana association of land trusts and its fiscal sponsor heart of the rockies initiative for strategic collaboration of Montana land trusts and community engagement to preserve and protect natural, economic, and agricultural heritage for future generations.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 64% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 96% 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.
- 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. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 88
- Transparency & Controls: 72
- Accountability: 91
- Sustainability: 69
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 85.2%; rating input score 85
- Program expense ratio: 94.1%; rating input score 94
- Fundraising efficiency: $80.83 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 88.2%; rating input score 88; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 37.5%; rating input score 38; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- 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: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 11.2%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.59; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 1.8%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 27.7% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 29% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 33.3% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 5 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 85.2% of revenue deployed · 94.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 11 of 13 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $21.8M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $147K · 16 people listed
- Consistency: 36 of 38 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 5 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 38/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.