Village and Wilderness Project Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
851486828
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2021
Location
Oak Bluffs, MA, USA
Phone
5086938939
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$593,500
Expenses
$386,234
Assets
$941,468
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Thomas H Chase (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Thomas H Chase (President): $121,766 total reported compensation
  • Tripti Thomas-Travers (Director): $92,676 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Land Conservation, Restore Ecosystems, and Climate Change

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 68% for direct work, and 32% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 68
  • Sustainability: 72
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 57.9%; rating input score 58
  • Program expense ratio: 89%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 86.8%; rating input score 87; 37th 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: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 22
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 34.9%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.44; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 55.5%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 40.9% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 29.9% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 46.6% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 57.9% of revenue deployed · 89% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $344K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $122K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 58/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 7 of 9 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.