The Murie Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
830328297
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015
Location
Moose, WY, USA
Phone
3077392246
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Natural Resources Conservation and Protection

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$222,782
Expenses
$297,972
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

People named in this filing

  • NANCY LEON (CHAIR)
  • ROB WALLACE (VICE-CHAIR)
  • LEN PURKIS (Treasurer)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Bringing people together to inspire action that preserves nature.

What it reported doing in 2015

Outreach & public interpretation planned tours: the murie center has created strong relationship with many organizations that like to bring many groups of visitors to the murie ranch. These organizations will bring new groups of people on a frequent basis e.g., tauck tours is a tour guide that brings participants through yellowstone and grand teton national park. While at the murie center we show the group through mardys house and the homestead, and point out and talk about the other cabins. Tours also include an overview of the muries achievements and how the murie center continues their legacy today. Teton science schools is another very strong partner of the murie center and frequently brings out groups of young students as well as, graduate students. Drop-in guests: at the murie center we have two types of drop-in guests, those who are looking for the murie center and those who wander down the road, unknowing where they will end up. Both type of drop-in visitor need different types of tours. With those who have previous murie knowledge and are interested in knowing specific information we may take them into the studio to see some of the murie archives and artifacts. For those who dont know where they are, we need to seize the opportunity to engage new visitors and supporters of the murie center. These people are usually interested in the history of the physical the ranch and knowing more about who the muries were.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 81% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 59
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 13
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 71.5%; rating input score 72
  • Program expense ratio: 53.5%; rating input score 53
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.9 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: -33.8%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -33.9% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -7.9% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -11.1% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 71.5% of revenue deployed · 53.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $159K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2010 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 53/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 13/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.