Valley Advocates for Responsible Development Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
820537849
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Driggs, ID, USA
Phone
2083541707
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Environmental Quality, Protection, and Beautification N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$290,912
Expenses
$222,686
Assets
$384,535
Liabilities
$5,207

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • ANJI RICHARDS (EXECUTIVE DI): $104,444 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to shape policy, guide development, and provide outreach to preserve natural resources, protect rural character, and promote vibrant communities in teton valley through civic action.

What it reported doing in 2025

Vard as a development tracker in teton valley: vard tracks development activity in the five government jurisdictions that comprise teton valley. Vard staffers prepare comments and attend public meetings on behalf of vard's 1,338 members. Watchdog activities include: performing a technical review for development proposals, reaching out to/negotiating with developers, educating the public about development activities, and taking legal action when necessary.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 97% 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 available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 50
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 47.9%; rating input score 48
  • Program expense ratio: 60.2%; rating input score 60
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.16 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 23.5%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.73; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 46.9%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4.8% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 47.9% of revenue deployed · 60.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $134K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $104K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 48/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 32/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 37/100.