West Wisconsin Land Trust Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
391618389
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2018
Forms available
Form 990 2018
Location
Menomonie, WI, USA
Phone
7152358850
Rating
87
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Farmland Preservation

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$64,399
Expenses
$5,349,015
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ROBERT FITZWILLIAM (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • LINDSEY KETCHEL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ROBERT FITZWILLIAM (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $5,980 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the west Wisconsin land trust, inc. Is to preserve western Wisconsin's natural character by informing, facilitating, and partnering with private landowners, communities, and local governments to protect valuable land.

What it reported doing in 2018

West Wisconsin land trust achieves its mission by permanently protecting important conservation lands through conservation easements and other land protection tools, by managing and monitoring protected lands, by assisting others in developing and advancing land protection strategies and by promoting the preservation of Wisconsin's unique natural resources. To date, west Wisconsin land trust has completed more than 200 conservation land projects protecting approximately 30,000 acres of land and assisted in the protection of thousands of additional acres of land. During 2017, west Wisconsin land trust continued to provide protection for the 8 nature preserves it owns and the 170 conservation easements it holds by monitoring and managing those lands and easements while engaging in extensive strategic planning, confirming its commitment to land conservation in western Wisconsin.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 84% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 98% 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 94
  • Transparency & Controls: 96
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 4
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 99.2%; rating input score 99
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.45 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • 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: Pass
    • 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: -8,206.1%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.1%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 64.6% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.7% per year; rating input score 0; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.6% per year; rating input score 0; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 99.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $5.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $6K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2010 to 2018
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 51/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 22/100.