Umpqua Watersheds

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
931165587
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Roseburg, OR, USA
Rating
97
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$114,073
Expenses
$126,942
Assets
$246,595
Liabilities
$3,017

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JANICE REID (President)
  • KEN CARLONI (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • JANICE REID (President)
  • KEN CARLONI (Vice President)
  • MARK EASON (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Umpqua watersheds is dedicated to the protection and restoration of the ecosystems of the umpqua watershed and beyond through education, training, advocacy and ecologically sound stewardship.

What it reported doing in 2024

Improve communication with public agencies, private landowners and industry through monthly public forums, quarterly newsletter, informative radio station, and restoration activities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 100
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -11.3%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.94; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.4%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.7% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.3% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $127K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.