Upper White River Basin Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
431942991
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Kimberling City, MO, USA
Phone
4177395001
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,498,628
Expenses
$1,565,770
Assets
$3,094,960
Liabilities
$93,206

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAVID CASALETTO THRU 1224 (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • CARIN LOVE (CHIEF OP OFF): $123,278 total reported compensation
  • DAVID CASALETTO THRU 1224 (PRESIDENT): $83,946 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To promote water quality in the upper white river basin watershed thorough bi-state collaboration on research, public policy and action projects in Arkansas and Missouri

What it reported doing in 2024

The foundation supports projects to monitor & report on water quality in the upper white river basin region of Arkansas and Missouri, and the buffalo river watershed region in Arkansas. These projects provide data and information on the state of the water quality and provides insight to the projected direction of water quality parameters. The foundation has worked with volunteer monitoring programs in both Arkansas and Missouri for field work and analysis of water quality. Volunteer monitoring programs in both Arkansas and Missouri partnerships include stream team programs in Arkansas, lakes of Missouri volunteer program, secchi day on beaver lake, streamsmart, and various other state agencies, ngos and governmental agencies.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 62% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90.6%; rating input score 91
  • Program expense ratio: 88.7%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -4.5%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.98; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.1%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.5% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 90.6% of revenue deployed · 88.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $123K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 25/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 43/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.